Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:42674)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOTEtqyUDhC4o-v2BBoEdisnSQ@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RX1DG-0002qg-BS; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:50:04 -0800
Received: by dajx4 with SMTP id x4sf2933688daj.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:49:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references
         :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:x-pgp-key
         :x-pgp-keyid:x-cunselcu'a-valsi:user-agent: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;
        bh=A3aq2TpcDFlw13D4V6l97hBycY/8RuLdIZFxAElmzPg=;
        b=lMRoUW/3q+vhyGUy2piu3n9VNpsNBw0fH17f+7IlnQZiWwmwNxot70wLcsYAJBDRFK
         M4zEs+Zr9K8Xr0ApmaIWW32CGtPnuqmxeDr3enG4zBT/b8yGmqosuG1YB/kPzEY2BUY+
         krAtsebwm8BwFlYp7+WkImZN7lAj6cwPVLdjw=
Received: by 10.68.4.136 with SMTP id k8mr1878570pbk.11.1322963384299;
        Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:49:44 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.26.8 with SMTP id h8ls19393862pbg.1.gmail; Sat, 03 Dec 2011
 17:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.56.163 with SMTP id b3mr16686655pbq.0.1322963383592;
        Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.56.163 with SMTP id b3mr16686654pbq.0.1322963383584;
        Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (mx.sdf.org. [192.94.73.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j5si7544547pbi.0.2011.12.03.17.49.43
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=192.94.73.19;
Received: from gonzales.homelinux.org (root@sverige.freeshell.org [192.94.73.4])
	by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB41ngc7015419
	for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 4 Dec 2011 01:49:43 GMT
Received: from martin by gonzales.homelinux.org with local (Exim 4.75)
	(envelope-from <mbays@sdf.org>)
	id 1RX1D4-0008LZ-GZ
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sat, 03 Dec 2011 20:49:42 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2011 20:49:42 -0500
From: Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] semantic parser - tersmu-0.1rc1
Message-ID: <20111204014942.GC11790@gonzales>
References: <CAO7tK2f3vj9sesm1XEOm4KArdxuKgAT84Whpn-D4HiaTFQXPWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111129225808.GA19818@gonzales>
 <20111201021703.GL2886@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2fH0ACodKJe7Hhwi8t_ivjiANg7d5cqEukudq6fRTZJXQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111203175028.GC12482@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2eDAX-HZMubt9k5coxY=AjnxbQj67t8-2TF-sTcsnrtug@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111203204015.GA11790@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2cMTBoMY2DUjpj00CORvUQOFo2PVoGvNOYu2Yv9ti3vEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20111203233303.GB11790@gonzales>
 <CAO7tK2f4A_E4SOXgR4W4hdE9jOL6Hq+pymtkLVjG0ehmTpHRPw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Clx92ZfkiYIKRjnr"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2f4A_E4SOXgR4W4hdE9jOL6Hq+pymtkLVjG0ehmTpHRPw@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key: http://mbays.freeshell.org/pubkey.asc
X-PGP-KeyId: B5FB2CD6
X-cunselcu'a-valsi: sirxo
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Original-Sender: mbays@sdf.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 best guess record for domain of mbays@sdf.org designates 192.94.73.19 as
 permitted sender) smtp.mail=mbays@sdf.org
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /


--Clx92ZfkiYIKRjnr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Saturday, 2011-12-03 at 21:21 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.=
com>:

> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> > * Saturday, 2011-12-03 at 19:06 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gm=
ail.com>:
> >> ro da poi verba cu pilno lo re xance be da lo nu kavbu lo bolci
> >
> > {ro da poi verba cu pilno pi ro xance be da [ku noi re mei ku'o] lo nu
> > kavbu lo bolci}
> >
> > s/pi ro/ro'oi/ if you prefer.
>=20
> "ro'oi" is not equivalent to "pi ro" though. "ro'oi" would say that
> each child uses the left hand, and the right hand, and both hands.
> "ro'oi da broda" entails "ro da broda" and "ro lo re mei cu broda" and
> "ro lo ci mei cu broda" and ... not just "pi ro lo ro mei cu broda"
> (assuming I'm getting "pi ro" right).

You're right. Is unnegated {ro'oi} ever useful?

> >> =A0 (prenex1) ge (prenex2) da da broda gi (prenex3) ko'a da broda
> >
> > Once we've got that far, I think it's clear. The two subsentences are
> > handled separately - i.e. can, donkey anaphora aside, be handled in
> > either order - each producing a proposition. So there must be two
> > existential quantifiers here, one for each subsentence.
>=20
> Then forethought and afterthought connectives would give different
> results when quantifiers are involved.

Yes.

> I don't think that's what the designers intended when coming up with
> their rules though.

I couldn't answer to that. All I can say is that the rule I have in mind
(and code) - always export to the closest prenex - seems coherent and
simple, and as far as I can tell is in full accordance with the
baseline.

If we're to let scope jump out of geks, why not also out of NOI-clauses
or NU-clauses?

Martin

--Clx92ZfkiYIKRjnr
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk7a0bYACgkQULC7OLX7LNYO8QCfVUpqVh6SmCP8YoAt0Q8tlXOw
7l4AnjNJyCv1cbOcpF6huS3EDpFeOCu/
=1MFW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Clx92ZfkiYIKRjnr--