To: lojban@googlegroups.com=20 Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 4:41 AM Subject: [lojban] Re: Is there any demand for LoCCan3? =20 Let's discuss it now ))). After reading the article I want new language even less. The monkey took the banana and ate it.=A0 Pam went home because she felt sick.=A0=A0 The dog ate the bird and it died.=A0 (!!!!!!!!!!!) In each case I can use {ta} and the context will decide who felt sick (the = house or Pam) and who died (the dog or the bird). In other cases =A0vo'a, ko'a can solve the problem. {sei} can be problematic for me but I hope CLL 1.1 will explain it. I can think of no other cases of anaphora. And it's still am mystery for me what can be done with 2. There should be new cmavo for individuals, sets and masses >3. new design of connectives On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:26:12 AM UTC+4, la .lindar. wrote: It's come up a few times. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Anaphora_(linguistics) > > > >I think we're working on the rest. > > >It's a theoretical next-step language, but I don't see it happening any ti= me soon since we're changing up our game. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lo= jban/-/ZqkHTaoWCKAJ. 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. --=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. --28592011-1241062965-1341252212=:22198 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

LoCCan3 ha= s been for more than 20 years (and before that there was Loglan 2.0) a repo= sitory for noting flaws perceived in Lojban (and before that Loglan) and fo= r suggested solutions and other improvements (read scare quotes where you w= ill). The active content has varied over the years: no one is hot for= adding or dropping phonemes at the moment, for example. But a few it= ems have endured, usually connected with perceived problems.

0. A complete redo of the vocabulary (obviously not back-com= patible). The present vocab clusters in some phonetic spaces and leav= es others bare, increasing the likelihood of confusion in noisy environment= s (if Lojban is ever used in one) and making it harder to find fragments fo= r constructing compounds and related cmavo. The only reason for the present word list is the claimed ease of learning, a claim that has ne= ver been tested on even English speakers, let alone Chinese or other langua= ges or relevant multilinguals. The evidence presented is either intui= tive or anecdotal and these are countered by anecdotal difficulties ("false= friends" they used to be called). The revamp includes a revision of = the definitions, which could be done separately (with a bit more compatibil= ity) to make the definitions simpler (generally fewer places, with many pla= ces that occur in many definitions but are rarely used spun off to preposit= ions) and more uniform (all words of the same sort (you are keeping your su= pply of scare quotes running, I hope) would have the same pattern of places= ). A general shake down of the cmavo system is also part of this, sha= rpening definitions, clarifying roles, getting rid of detritus, relieving c= onfusion pressure, etc. For the most part, this is not Lojban at all but the beginnings of a real third generation from Loglan. So= not going to happen until the next charismatic nut-case comes along.

1. Anaphora. The logical ideal is a way to refer ba= ck to any previously mentioned thing unambiguously and transparently from a= nywhere in the later discourse. Practically impossible with pronouns,= unless every noun is assigned a carrier at birth (and there are problems e= ven with that). Loglan can come remarkably close, but the system bare= ly works with written text and is just not practical in spoken language bey= ond very short intervals. The usable Lojban techniques, official and = not, work as well as the unofficial for the most part but are also of limit= ed scope. The rule "Repetition is also anaphora" seems the best way t= o go, though even it has to be used carefully in some Cataphora= (referring to something about to be mentioned) is always short scope and can be eased by mentioning it now already.

2. Words for individuals and sets and masses arose out of the muddl= e, inherited from Loglan and not much tidied up in CLL, about what exactly = 'lo broda' referred to. The old underlying logic had only individuals= , some of which were sets that contained other individuals (or not). = The problem then was to deal with groups that did not behave like sets in s= et theory but could still go in for individual variables. For some re= ason, the notion that ordinary sets could take properties in different ways= from the usual ways for sets did not occur to anyone, so this remained a p= roblem. Until xorxes found a book about plural reference/instantiatio= n. According to this, a singular noun could refer to several things a= t once and a singular variable could be simultaneously instantiated to seve= ral things at once. Conceptually differently, but formally the same, sets could be Lesniewskian rather than Cantorian, so that getting to= the members of a set is much easier (as is talking about what happens).&nb= sp; Once 'lo broda' was taken to refer to an L-set of brodas, much of the r= est fell into place. Because the theory is also of the part-whole rel= ation, it is sometimes necessary to distinguish the relevant individuals (o= nes with no relevant parts) and also to be able to talk about wholes (L-set= s) in the abstract way that one normally talks about C-sets. This mea= ns that some of the gadri need redefinition (or clarification of the given = definitions). There are also some residual problems with 'lo' left ov= er from Loglan that need sorting out. None of this has much affect on= current or past text.

3, The original four lo= gical connectives, and their derivatives (often more interesting) and the h= andful of non-logical ones have multiplied sixfold or more. As the language is built, these are needed to preserve the underlying logical= structure, to provide a way to get back to the underlying simple sentences= connected sententially from the given complex sentence involving con= nected terms or predicates or bridi tails or whatever. The quest here= has been to find a simpler way of marking these transformations without ne= eding a whole new vocabulary at each stage. The fact that the reconst= ruction process involved is not proven to be correct also needs some lookin= g at. This may be a minor matter of reinterpreting given forms or it = may take a thorough reworking of the connective parts of the grammar.

4. RHE. Though the grammatical right-hand end= problems are mainly solved (with the constant danger of misuse leading to = your saying something quite different from what you meant), the logical one= s are less well dealt with (the "get back to the formula" problem seen in 3). So far, informal conventions seem to be in place and the= re are some cmavo for doing some of these jobs. But they are rarely u= sed and not well described. They do not form clear groups in the cmav= o lists, though grouping them might not be a problem (and the fact that the= y are very different might be an advantage).

That is what LoCCan3 actively contains at the moment.

<= div>

From:= gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 2, 2012 4:41 AM Subject: [lojban] Re: Is there any= demand for LoCCan3?

Let's discuss it now ))).

After reading the ar= ticle I want new language even less.

The monkey too= k the banana and ate it.

Pam went home be= cause she felt sick.

The dog ate the bird and it died. (!!!!!!!!!!!)

In each case I can use {ta} and the context will decide w= ho felt sick (the house or Pam) and who died (the dog or the bird).

In other cases vo'a, ko'a can solve the problem.

{sei} can be problematic for me but I hope CLL 1.1 w= ill explain it.

I can think of no other cases of anap= hora.

And it's still am mystery for me what can be= done with

2. There should be new cmavo for individuals, sets and mass= es
3. new design of connectives

On Monday, July 2, 2012 10:26:12 AM UTC+4, la .lindar. wrote:It's come up a few times.=
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Anaphora_(= linguistics)

I think we're working on the = rest.

It's a theoretical next-step language, but I= don't see it happening any time soon since we're changing up our game.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://= groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/ZqkHTaoWCKAJ.
=20 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.

--
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.
--28592011-1241062965-1341252212=:22198--