Received: from mail-bw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:41474) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1RUzbu-0006LK-PQ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:43:05 -0800 Received: by bkat2 with SMTP id t2sf7505053bka.16 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=VzVhXtv3wQVRPvdea2kM3SSXhLGzJ1hce+ZtgNZp0f8=; b=wjVouc1xgZuT560yndQFJVBbv4JoXUIBgvBkixEE3wIcZllYPxgVsTq9mmYBAspszF 5u8sLDOmUzYkXp1WqkqtsMPyYx1bBtwxHEbVMML4n/ywba9Sj2CDWJEC4QF8cEd39SA4 miOqXlnHn56meNadDBSmEWL2zGVKCrPmyHPhw= Received: by 10.205.121.147 with SMTP id gc19mr4663210bkc.22.1322480568599; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:48 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.152.154 with SMTP id g26ls11369784bkw.3.gmail; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.129.8 with SMTP id m8mr6776568bks.5.1322480566225; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.129.8 with SMTP id m8mr6776567bks.5.1322480566210; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f41.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v13si6624957bkf.0.2011.11.28.03.42.46 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.41; Received: by mail-lpp01m010-f41.google.com with SMTP id b11so683762lam.0 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.152.125.196 with SMTP id ms4mr28105949lab.50.1322480566039; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.74] (87-194-76-177.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.76.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id iy5sm13263921lab.16.2011.11.28.03.42.43 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 03:42:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4ED373B2.8010103@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:42:42 +0000 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111103 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] semantic parser - tersmu-0.1rc1 References: <20111124044118.GF6112@gonzales> <20111126112901.GA27177@gonzales> <4ED238C9.3060703@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 27/11/2011 17:12: > On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, And Rosta wrote: >> Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 26/11/2011 17:35: >>> >>> Assuming >>> >>> (1) le broda =3D zo'e noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda >>> >>> (2) ko'a voi broda =3D ko'a noi mi ke'a do skicu lo ka broda >> >> I think they're both wrong. The "noi" would introduce an illocutionary >> element I-HEREBY-ASSERT-INCIDENTALLY, that is not present in "le broda = =3D >> ko'a voi broda". Rather, "le broda =3D ko'a voi broda" involve an >> illocutionary element DEI-KE'A-DO-SKICU, "I-HEREBY-NONVERIDICALLY-SAY". > > I think the "I-HEREBY-ASSERT" part is not really in noi, but rather > it's the default illocutionary operator for otherwise unmarked > propositions, but it can be changed with "noi xu ...", "noi .a'o ...", > "noi .ei ...", "noi .e'o ..." and so on. > > And "voi", assuming it's a variant of "noi" and not of "poi", should > then be something like "noi pe'a". That's a good analysis, but it requires you to distinguish between clauses = that contain no illocutionary operator and that clauses that contain an exp= licit or implicit illocutionary operator, since noi clauses would belong to= the latter type. =20 --And. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.