Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2dtgFd=Q6+mLieVW8118g+C+viyYsgdQ_1rB3JdwP5PKw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+gZtg+wPBdc-Y_Xkk6T51qKU0JobTsC5MRW_LW9kFDbZsBPJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1367501520.18899.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CA+gZtgJfex3NafhF9OZj3L1WY+H6zsX30nuVmoR5amd08ny7FA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2dhzFCom3jOJyhPUROGRPR3ZAvTqX2LLAzhejCM4AS7GA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+gZtg+d0b2_nJFmgDXwOJ5d9QppYTQW31h8wyGiZ4LNVb=nrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2dtgFd=Q6+mLieVW8118g+C+viyYsgdQ_1rB3JdwP5PKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 20:52:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+gZtg+f6oX=Aj3cn7zP002iyZUMrJ_L2Ghk6TKHXJkNV5hVyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Time-(non)local sumti (was: Mixing tenses, on the
 beginners list)
From: Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c6466bdcd3d04dbc5c306
X-Spam_score: 1.5
X-Spam_score_int: 15
X-Spam_bar: +
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
    wrote: > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>wrote:
    > >> This amounts to saying it can be local or nonlocal, but doesn't specify
    >> how to *explicitly* state the distinction. The ability to make such >>
    specifications (if the language supports them at all) is pretty much my >>
    third axiom for Lojban design :) >> >> > I don't think the language supports
    that disticntion via grammar (it can > make it semantically just as you are
    making it in English, of course). If > you want a grammatical support for
    the distinction, I guess the first step > would be to show why it would be
    desirable. Just because a distinction can > be made is not reason enough
   to make it. > A more precise statement of the axiom is that if there's a distinction
    that can be made, you should be able to make it explicitly, and (for the
   most part) should have the option to just not make it, as well. In other words,
    nothing we care about should be required to be implicit, to the extent possible.
    English more or less fails to meet this requirement all the way down at the
    grammatical level, since you can't really maintain control of how clauses
    attach to one another. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (1.5 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
                             (blindbravado[at]gmail.com)
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
                             See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [URIs: googlegroups.com]
  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
  1.6 FR_ALMOST_VIAG2        RAW: Almost looks like viagra.
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU          Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
                             domain
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

--089e013c6466bdcd3d04dbc5c306
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com> wro=
te:

>
> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>wrote=
:
>
>> This amounts to saying it can be local or nonlocal, but doesn't specify
>> how to *explicitly* state the distinction. The ability to make such
>> specifications (if the language supports them at all) is pretty much my
>> third axiom for Lojban design :)
>>
>>
> I don't think the language supports that disticntion via grammar (it can
> make it semantically just as you are making it in English, of course). If
> you want a grammatical support for the distinction, I guess the first ste=
p
> would be to show why it would be desirable. Just because a distinction ca=
n
> be made is not reason enough to make it.
>
A more precise statement of the axiom is that if there's a distinction that
can be made, you should be able to make it explicitly, and (for the most
part) should have the option to just not make it, as well. In other words,
nothing we care about should be required to be implicit, to the extent
possible. English more or less fails to meet this requirement all the way
down at the grammatical level, since you can't really maintain control of
how clauses attach to one another.

>
> (What are your other axioms?)
>
First axiom: the grammar is formally parsable, with a significant amount of
"structural semantics" being reflected in the parse tree. A formally
parsable language with only one grammatical class meets the first
requirement but not the second. su'o so'a natlangs meet the second
requirement (i.e. if you have a parse tree you can make inferences about
low-level semantics) but not the first.

Second axiom: referential and semantic transparency to the extent possible.
This is not an expectation of perfection, it's a goal rather than a
requirement.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


--089e013c6466bdcd3d04dbc5c306
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Jorge Llamb=EDas <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jjllambias@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">jjll=
ambias@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote">
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_ext=
ra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 8:0=
2 PM, Ian Johnson <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:blindbravado@gmai=
l.com" target=3D"_blank">blindbravado@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>


<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><span style=3D"color:r=
gb(34,34,34)">This amounts to saying it can be local or nonlocal, but doesn=
&#39;t specify how to *explicitly* state the distinction. The ability to ma=
ke such specifications (if the language supports them at all) is pretty muc=
h my third axiom for Lojban design :)</span><br>


</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><br></div>=
</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I don&#39;t think =
the language supports that disticntion via grammar (it can make it semantic=
ally just as you are making it in English, of course). If you want a gramma=
tical support for the distinction, I guess the first step would be to show =
why it would be desirable. Just because a distinction can be made is not re=
ason enough to make it.</div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><div style>A more precise statement of the a=
xiom is that if there&#39;s a distinction that can be made, you should be a=
ble to make it explicitly, and (for the most part) should have the option t=
o just not make it, as well. In other words, nothing we care about should b=
e required to be implicit, to the extent possible. English more or less fai=
ls to meet this requirement all the way down at the grammatical level, sinc=
e you can&#39;t really maintain control of how clauses attach to one anothe=
r.</div>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">
<div><br></div><div>(What are your other axioms?)</div></div></div></div></=
blockquote><div style>First axiom: the grammar is formally parsable, with a=
 significant amount of &quot;structural semantics&quot; being reflected in =
the parse tree. A formally parsable language with only one grammatical clas=
s meets the first requirement but not the second. su&#39;o so&#39;a natlang=
s meet the second requirement (i.e. if you have a parse tree you can make i=
nferences about low-level semantics) but not the first.=A0</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Second axiom: referential and semantic tran=
sparency to the extent possible. This is not an expectation of perfection, =
it&#39;s a goal rather than a requirement.</div><div style><br></div><div s=
tyle>
mi&#39;e la latro&#39;a mu&#39;o</div></div></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3De=
n">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--089e013c6466bdcd3d04dbc5c306--