Received: from mail-iy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.210.189]:63142)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRCz4JT3BBoEhZGSYg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1RZrzh-0008BG-8H; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:48 -0800
Received: by iaeh11 with SMTP id h11sf2592474iae.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-id:x-yahoo-newman-property
         :x-ymail-osg:x-yahoo-smtp:references:in-reply-to
         :x-apple-yahoo-original-message-folder:mime-version:message-id
         :x-mailer:from:x-apple-yahoo-replied-msgid:subject:date: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=SOKN119L/FCBypOHBScmVF7xErsNb7tm2wXT/SjPups=;
        b=U8Gngc+oMdYmClJKw4MkKwdgNz2v9TEmzLVagZAZSiQDWcYW15+AyJ79VdhhgrvJet
         J2XM4I+R4EEI+iSgWFoWNZtJSkbabVTsYjEL5TzgcauF35fNdcBI+DkLWOIVaCn8+Y5E
         DHvQNjylXGm3oKTm+ieEk5b7teVPl5l6581FQ=
Received: by 10.50.149.193 with SMTP id uc1mr1643277igb.17.1323642931233;
        Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:31 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.231.209.209 with SMTP id gh17ls11183256ibb.4.gmail; Sun, 11
 Dec 2011 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.43.48.202 with SMTP id ux10mr19083165icb.6.1323642930129;
        Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.43.48.202 with SMTP id ux10mr19083164icb.6.1323642930095;
        Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nm9-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm9-vm4.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com. [98.138.91.169])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id f9si4545768icp.4.2011.12.11.14.35.29;
        Sun, 11 Dec 2011 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.138.91.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=98.138.91.169;
Received: from [98.138.90.57] by nm9.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2011 22:35:29 -0000
Received: from [98.138.89.197] by tm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2011 22:35:29 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1055.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2011 22:35:29 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 655485.91667.bm@omp1055.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 94946 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2011 22:35:29 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: T8TAzvAVM1nLfxvMClsoOqeEnpKfKEO6uNu3GrnLadjvuOx
 vx_3XMujrA5G_9oo0dKHu4EXpAmWuA1khvhaSm.MnDSzLDU0wCkboCeZqI_b
 lm1VbBre4J5paRm8DmVT8Kg58CgO4ZNjf2SXCb4o9WMZ3aXaQUCCU6DREq2o
 LBm5I7UyNUoT58jDBKYxLWTo_KVbcp3.qSXszsn.BxTQZzF9MF7bmI5bQKMb
 uDzJDsKqFfZW97pwlhdufc6FjzQajKQsl9nJYHN2viq_OXKgF_p5ROZEaqig
 Qvl_B6Rc_peOuugkVlKm8m2eMHTzvIenBmV7T3Mdu6qsd5z7zk7FPMlHzble
 L4W4oMdVzuN94agwpLRun6u1X4md6MT7Q4.x0vqgrPZAYgfrUfpdRZiFweLc
 HLJNNMfFlgwB2xcuHCd163yMnv43pBkTw68TLaMAX4iCKFci.9BZ.MrScbtb
 Pq_ADGIgOqlv9sTMruDQjCLmzeYmeGWRSq0VvUpMBhdJ0ZrxIqw--
X-Yahoo-SMTP: xvGyF4GswBCIFKGaxf5wSjlg3RF108g-
Received: from [192.168.1.68] (kali9putra@99.92.108.41 with xymcookie)
        by smtp103-mob.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2011 14:35:29 -0800 PST
References: <1323373742.18817.YahooMailRC@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <CAO7tK2dghkmpansUrBCZY7HkcH0sBGWzDpv+d8hB7ge9MuV9Ag@mail.gmail.com> <C261B304-A8BC-4955-9016-72D1F24B5471@yahoo.com> <CAO7tK2eRL4D7Yy-Sz=JUcTtnwuyKt_tnBx9XjhRkzpgQmB2igw@mail.gmail.com> <857BF1E4-628A-4E05-BC02-A90D15C6895E@yahoo.com> <CAO7tK2eWxBL9QdUnunoDY63GTV82=aX+B+zsQDOFj3axED4fWg@mail.gmail.com> <1323554331.43014.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <CAO7tK2eiu5Haj+fz-GV4z+JaH6G+Vz9hQXt51_i4Yk4_kB35Uw@mail.gmail.com> <1323633014.33678.YahooMailRC@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <CAO7tK2cBXd4WP2DbHS8ZS2vbbHX8QCt5trg_9UxjNqHyAQiLTA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2cBXd4WP2DbHS8ZS2vbbHX8QCt5trg_9UxjNqHyAQiLTA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Apple-Yahoo-Original-Message-Folder: AAlojbanery
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8G4)
Message-Id: <5291628E-3707-4DE5-9EEE-7FD3772C3F96@yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8G4)
From: "John E. Clifford" <kali9putra@yahoo.com>
X-Apple-Yahoo-Replied-Msgid: 1_12206043_AHnHjkQAAGsMTuUYIgS8sV90LkU
Subject: Re: [lojban] semantic parser - tersmu-0.1rc1
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 16:37:35 -0600
To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.138.91.169
 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /



Sent from my iPad

On Dec 11, 2011, at 2:52 PM, Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 4:50 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> w=
rote:
>>=20
>>  At the least, there should be a process of
>> converting FOL into Lojban that would justify the reverse reconstruction=
.
>=20
> Converting FOL into Lojban is trivial.

Not obviously, since you are about to introduce expressions which are more =
remote from FOL and thus, even if arbitrary and conventional, subject to th=
ings like unintended consequences (omitted arguments, {zo'e}, and, I assume=
, all the descriptions are the currently interesting cases).
>=20
> But in addition to all the expressions obtained from converting FOL
> into Lojban, Lojban has additional grammatical expressions (usually
> more compact) not obtained directly by conversion from FOL but rather
> from a set of arbitrary (but consistent) rules. These compact
> expressions are declared to be equivalent to some other expression
> obtained by direct conversion. This set of consistent but arbitrary
> rules are what this thread is about. They cannot be justified by any
> argument from logic because they do not arise out of anything to do
> with logic. The compact expressions are there just for convenience,
> not out of any logical necessity.
>=20
>=20
>>>> intermediate constructions which are not to be taken too
>>>> seriously (except that they usually are also sentences of Lojban) on t=
he way
>>> to the final results.
>>>=20
>>> Which intermediate construction is not to be taken too seriously? If
>>> there was such intermediate construction, the whole thing falls apart.
>>> The whole point of the rules is that there be no gaps in moving from
>>> the non-standard form to the standard one.
>>=20
>> ?? "such intermediate construction" I suppose means "one that is not a L=
ojban
>> sentence".
>=20
> I meant "one that is not to be taken seriously".

This seems to be the same thing in practice.
>=20
>> Well, is there a guarantee that the rules will never lead to one on
>> the way to a correct interpretation?
>=20
> Of course. They are, by construction, all equivalent in meaning.
>=20
>> (1) ge su'o da zo'u ko'a da broda gi su'o da zo'u ko'e da broda
>>=20
>> (2) su'o da zo'u ge ko'a da broda gi ko'e da broda
>>=20
>> The only justification we
>> may add for the choice is which one makes the whole system nicer, and
>> in my view that means choosing (2) simply because I think it's better
>> to stick with left over right scope. What possible justification
>> beyond that are you looking for?
>>=20
>> I assume you mean (1) here, since that is what your convention selects.
>=20
> Yes, sorry.
>=20
>>>> I am not sure I understand your objection to the traditional solution =
to
>>> donkey
>>>> sentences.  Do you know of cases where it just doesn't work?
>>>=20
>>> Changing a narrow scope existential into a wide scope universal? And
>>> already mentioned cases where that doesn't work: "most farmers who own
>>> a donkey, beat it"
>>=20
>> Sorry, why doesn't it work?  For all donkeys x, for most farmers y who o=
wn x, y
>> beats x.
>=20
> Because that has a different meaning. Suppose there is one donkey that
> is not beaten by any of its owners. Your proposed expansion is
> obviously false, but the English "most farmers who own a donkey, beat
> it" could still be true, no?
>=20
Thanks.  I've obviously been away from this too long, since I forgot the po=
int of the original problem.

> mu'o mi'e xorxes
>=20
> --=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@googlegr=
oups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb=
an?hl=3Den.
>=20

--=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.