Received: from mail-wg0-f60.google.com ([74.125.82.60]:47090) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WzmAU-0006Nh-Uh for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:17 -0700 Received: by mail-wg0-f60.google.com with SMTP id n12sf206789wgh.15 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=QjvOva1ia8rLhv73UdPgprqlAQ/wWIOKxy9fVr/0RqM=; b=jEXveRbJ8tUKmFPn8yYpQxLH0mlWeoGy1PibGu/+4JmHLPFGM02NvslrxmJs6dRf26 9KilnPIxp6Q92TdEdVKEs9L+B6UMrsLJAZvwSyKUt+wndqGpdhF8R5UH1DzOBxVq+TNU Vq//l2/l79ge6ALiYXRPRv/uAivgezQO3WTgEEDhFpvMMhM5iLc7JvN8GQczhu4Em4xi IxXMCQeJmaAxJ3f+YUyQHdm+HNBiu/ksU1Li1M2yXl6W3t9ZpPtKRLCBy4ue7oR4YsRj jaHF1vB8lsRfQlJTA8cAyLYjwa4L3D3qFWT74x+6a1jtNYJc+cwyZjoQR8TQNvlM6qot 1txA== X-Received: by 10.152.5.39 with SMTP id p7mr12551lap.4.1403698745064; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.28.105 with SMTP id a9ls9629lah.79.gmail; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.11.229 with SMTP id t5mr978581lbb.10.1403698743788; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wg0-x22c.google.com (mail-wg0-x22c.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r13si321619wib.0.2014.06.25.05.19.03 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c; Received: by mail-wg0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id x13so1917823wgg.15 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.24.2 with SMTP id q2mr10223299wif.22.1403698743546; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.71.197 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 05:19:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <273fe5a5-b80e-4df3-87b0-3c916ed920a9@googlegroups.com> References: <3854b8c6-4e18-4b76-9039-d1d5cdbcbb16@googlegroups.com> <1402323602.64243.YahooMailNeo@web181105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1402336485.50854.YahooMailNeo@web181103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <273fe5a5-b80e-4df3-87b0-3c916ed920a9@googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 16:19:03 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] What are the official goals of lojban? From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043be1e2fb1d1c04fca8148c X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --f46d043be1e2fb1d1c04fca8148c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hm, i can't see syntactic unambiguity in the list of your goals. Does this mean lojban aims not only for syntactic but for semantic unambiguity as well? Does lojban have a goal of a semantic regularization and if yes then to what extent? I can see that e.g. the place structure of words for animals is more or less homogeneous. Does Lojban aims for being a metalanguage in future machine translation applications? Does this eventually mean it is supposed to be an auxiliary language in that you write in Lojban, and your text is automatically translated into high quality texts in other languages? 2014-06-25 15:47 GMT+04:00 Andrew Browne : > Thanks, PC. Your blog post makes a convincing argument that being > unambiguous, or what you are calling "monoparsing" (you are the only hit = on > google for this term, so I'll stick to the conventional terminology), is > lojban's most distinguishing feature, but I do not think that it answers > the question of goals. > > > > To summarize your unofficial response, the goals are: > > 1) to be a usable language > > 2) to be unambiguous > > 3) to be able to be mapped to a symbolic logic expression > > > I think 1) and 2) are well stated goals. They are clear and simple, makin= g > it easy to see if they are being met or not. > > Your goals 2) and 3) seem like instrumental goals, rather than terminal > goals. > > > > > > When I posted the question, I tried to gather references, but avoid > posting any interpretation of them since my interpretation is not relevan= t > to the question of the official stance. > > > > Since the discussion is turning unofficial, I=E2=80=99ll offer my opinion= . These > are the bits in the references that I think/hope/expect best describe the > goals: > > > "enhancing the measurable performance of its learners" > > =E2=80=9Clanguage limits thought.=E2=80=9C > > =E2=80=9Ctake the suspected limits off, more precisely, to push them outw= ard in > some direction" > > =E2=80=9Cextremely logical.=E2=80=9D > > > > To state the goals in my own words: > > > The goal of lojban is to be a usable language which enhances thought. > > - maximize facility for logical thought: clear, sound, consistent reasoni= ng > > - minimize limitations on thought > > > What do we mean by =E2=80=9Clogical=E2=80=9D?: > > - clarity is logical > > - consistency and regularity is logical > > - being systematic is logical > > - being objective and unbiased is logical > > > What are limitations on thought?: > > - relative difficulty expressing relatively simple concepts > > - not allowing vagueness is a limitation; vagueness reduces limit of > minimal precision > > - ambiguity is a limitation on clarity > > > Note: The goal of lojban is not to test the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. > However this hypothesis inspired lojban=E2=80=99s goals and lojban should= be ideal > for testing it. > > > Note: Some people may advocate being =E2=80=9Crational=E2=80=9D over =E2= =80=9Clogical=E2=80=9D. The term > =E2=80=9Crational=E2=80=9D is not used in the goal statement with the vie= w that; logical > thought is required to evaluate and choose rational actions. > > > Note: Ambiguousness is multiple possible distinct/unrelated meanings. > Vagueness is a single meaning, expressed with less precision. > > > > I think many of the instrumental goals and design features derive from > these goals. > > > Stuff my goals (and notes) do not cover: > > - Does =E2=80=9Cenhances thought=E2=80=9D apply to learners, speakers, or= thinkers? Is it > still expected to apply when they are not speaking/thinking in lojban? > > - Should the definition mention simplicity (or avoiding unnecessary > complexity) as an aspect of being logical? is that part of clarity? > =E2=80=9CSimplicity is the ultimate sophistication." > > - Stability and backwards compatibility; is this part of usability? > > - The need?/goal? to specify/document much/all of the language. > > > Other interesting points for this definition: > > - Viewing a team of people/computers as a single entity, communication > within that entity is part of thought. Communication as language may even > be necessary within one brain (that is my unsupported speculation). > > > > > Discussion aside, I still hope for an official answer to the question - > and I think it is an important question deserving of one. > > Officially, what are the goals of lojban? > > Thanks, > > Andrew / DerSaidin > > > > > On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 3:54:48 AM UTC+10, clifford wrote: > >> vid: Lojban is monoparsing on pckipo.blogspot.com >> >> >> On Monday, June 9, 2014 9:20 AM, 'John E Clifford' via lojban < >> loj...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >> >> VERY unofficially, the goal of Lojban is to have a usable language which >> is syntactically unambiguous, that is, is such that every grammatical >> utterance has a unique and correct parse (monoparsing, for short). If i= t >> is not meeting this goal, Lojban is unduly complex for meeting whatever >> other goals it may have (all of which are met more efficiently by other >> constructed languages, most by even, say, toki pona). Lojban has some >> reason to claim that it meets this goal, at least that it has a grammar >> that gives a unique parse to each grammatical sentence. What is less >> clearly demonstrated is that this parse is always correct in the sense t= hat >> it maps directly onto a unique formula of symbolic logic, though this >> appears likely, given the care which has been devoted to details that su= ch >> a mapping would involve >> >> >> On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:54 AM, Andrew Browne >> wrote: >> >> >> >> What are the official goals of lojban? >> >> >> It is important to have an understanding of the goals for ongoing work >> (finishing BPFK sections, etc.), otherwise we will end up with stuff tha= t >> is inconsistent. >> I think many people involved have an implicit understanding of the goals= , >> due to having been around much longer, and/or closely involved in BPFK. >> >> I am after an official clear statement of goals for lojban (or reference >> to one), for the benefit of those of us who have not been around for so >> long (and clarification for everyone else). >> >> >> >> The best source I can find is the CLL: >> https://dag.github.io/cll/1/1/ >> >> The goals for the language were first described in the open literature i= n >> the article =E2=80=9CLoglan=E2=80=9D, published in Scientific American, = June, 1960. >> >> >> >> The following are the main features of Lojban: >> Lojban is designed to be used by people in communication with each other= , >> and possibly in the future with computers. >> Lojban is designed to be neutral between cultures. >> Lojban grammar is based on the principles of predicate logic. >> Lojban has an unambiguous yet flexible grammar. >> Lojban has phonetic spelling, and unambiguously resolves its sounds into >> words. >> Lojban is simple compared to natural languages; it is easy to learn. >> Lojban=E2=80=99s 1300 root words can be easily combined to form a vocabu= lary of >> millions of words. >> Lojban is regular; the rules of the language are without exceptions. >> Lojban attempts to remove restrictions on creative and clear thought and >> communication. >> Lojban has a variety of uses, ranging from the creative to the >> scientific, from the theoretical to the practical. >> Lojban has been demonstrated in translation and in original works of >> prose and poetry. >> >> >> >> >> I also found some other materials with similar lists of features, and a >> similar reference to the goals of TLI Loglan: >> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3DLojban_Introductory_Brochure >> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3Dralju_papri >> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3DFrom_Wikibooks:_ >> Lojban/Introduction_to_Lojban#Lojban >> >> >> There has also been some discussion of goals on this list: >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/lojban/goals/ >> lojban/jDRfYun5Rs4/o8LqJicWwyUJ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Several of these sources have referenced the goals of TLI Loglan. >> So what are the goals of TLI Loglan? >> >> Note; I'm quoting the bits I think are possibly relevant to my question >> of goals, trying to provide a helpful summary. >> Please read more of these documents to get more context or to add >> anything else I missed. >> >> >> >> First, lets look in that 1960 Scientific American Article mentioned >> earlier: >> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Scientific+American+article >> http://members.home.nl/w.dijkhuis/loglan_jcb/Brown_JC_loglan.html >> http://www.dersaidin.net/lojban/reference/LoglanScientificAmerican1960/ >> (mirror) >> >> It was to supply an instrument for experimental investigation of the >> Leibniz-Whorf hypothesis that we undertook our work on Loglan in 1955. >> Loglan was to be an artificial language, but one especially designed to >> test the thesis that the structure of language determines the forms of >> thought. >> It was to have a small, easily learned vocabulary derived from the word >> stock of as many of the major natural languages as proved feasible (thou= gh >> it was not intended to be an auxiliary international language). >> Its rules of grammar and syntax were to be as few and regular as possibl= e. >> It was to utilize a short list of speech sounds (phonemes) common to the >> natural languages [see table on opposite page], and it was to be >> phonetically spelled. >> >> >> >> But most important, Loglan was to incorporate as many of the notational >> devices of modern logic and mathematics as could be adapted to its use. >> >> >> >> >> >> The other good source I found on TLI Loglan is this book, Loglan1 (which >> appears to me to be the TLI Loglan equivalent of CLL): >> https://ia700400.us.archive.org/11/items/Loglan1/Loglan1.pdf >> http://www.dersaidin.net/lojban/reference/Loglan1.pdf (mirror) >> >> In chapter 1, there are sections 1 through 9 that cover a different goal >> (or maybe feature/viewpoint). >> >> *1.1 The Scientific Strategy* >> >> Loglan is a language which was originally devised to test the Sapir-Whor= f >> hypothesis >> that the structure of language determines the boundaries of human though= t. >> >> >> The most promising way to create such a difference, it seemed to me, was >> to exaggerate some >> natural function of human language, that is, to increase the functional >> adequacy of some complex >> of linguistic structures in a way that would have a strong independent >> likelihood of enhancing >> the measurable performance of its learners on some specified set of >> tasks. Besides, in its original >> formulation the Whorf hypothesis is a negative one: language limits >> thought. One way of >> disclosing such phenomena is to take the suspected limits off, more >> precisely, to push them >> outward in some direction in which removing limits would have predictabl= e >> effects. So it was >> settled. The diminutive language should also be a functionally extreme >> one in some known or >> presumable way: an extremely poetic one, say, or an extremely efficient >> one, or extremely >> logical. >> >> >> *1.2 Loglan as a Logical Language* >> >> But the claim invested in this metaphor is in fact narrower than the wid= e >> word 'logical' suggests. Loglan is logical only in the sense of >> purporting to facilitate certain >> limited kinds of thought: namely those kinds which proceed by the >> transformation of sentences >> into other sentences in such a way that if the first are true so also ar= e >> the second. We might >> also expect it to minimize, or help prevent, the errors that are usually >> made in performing such >> deductive operations. But these are fairly modest senses of the word >> 'logical'. We might have >> meant to convey by it the much stronger claim that Loglan is a deductive >> system, in the sense >> that geometry and formal logic are. To support such a claim we would hav= e >> had to show that >> Loglan had a set of elementary notions and elementary operations from >> which all its complex >> notions and complex operations had been rigorously derived. But we do no= t >> make this claim. >> >> >> *1.3 Loglan as a Laboratory Instrument* >> >> Apart from the thought-facilitating functions of Loglan, the language is >> also meant to be a >> manageable laboratory instrument: teachable, measurable, controllable; >> its structure transparently >> observable both at the moment of introduction into any experiment and in >> continuous change >> >> >> But Loglan does seem to be easily learned,11 and on every formal >> parameter it is agreeably small. >> The number of its grammar rules is an order of magnitude less than has >> come to be expected of natural grammars from recent work. >> >> >> While the size of a language is not the only factor that determines the >> speed with which it is learned, it is >> undoubtedly an important one; and all my early teaching trials have >> suggested that Loglan is indeed very rapidly learned. >> >> >> Another feature of the language that reflects its intended use as a >> laboratory instrument is its cultural neutrality. >> >> >> *1.4 Loglan in the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory* >> >> Loglan grammar is not only known but already written in a >> machine-parsable code. So it is itself the beginning of an AI program. >> >> >> Besides, if the partial grammars now in hand are any indication, >> when a complete grammar of a natural human language is finally written, >> it will be far too large >> for programmatic manipulation in the AI lab. Natural languages are very >> large affairs. >> >> >> Thus, more than anything else it is the small size, formal completeness >> and machine parsability >> of Loglan grammar that seem to suit it for manipulation in the artificia= l >> intelligence laboratory. >> >> >> *1.5 Loglan at the Machine-Man interface* >> >> ...to make the machine-man interface truly comfortable for humans and ye= t >> continue to be instructive >> for machines, we need a language in which the requirements of both human= s >> and machines are met. >> >> >> Loglan may be such a language. We have seen that it is utterly >> unequivocal grammatically. One >> consequence is that we humans become aware of what we are actually sayin= g >> when we talk >> Loglan. So a Loglan-speaking human is much less likely to say one thing >> while meaning another, >> thus misinforming his or her machine. Also, as we shall see in the next >> chapter, Loglan words >> resolve uniquely from the speech-stream; no 'I scream'/'Ice cream' >> phenomena exist in it. So even >> spoken instructions are unequivocal in Loglan. This is true of no other >> language. Being able to >> speak freely composed instructions spontaneously would add immeasurably >> to the speed and >> comfort of the interaction for humans, and yet, because it's Loglan, its >> being spoken would not >> diminish its precision for machines. >> >> >> What do we human partners in this high-powered interaction require? That >> we be permitted to >> express our thoughts fully, freely and spontaneously without the risk of >> seriously misinforming >> our machines. That we be able to understand most of the machine's >> word-choices and all its >> utterance-forms immediately, and be able to clarify by interrogation >> whatever part of the >> computer's responses to us we do not immediately understand. >> >> >> *1.6 Loglan as a Translation Medium* >> >> Consider the problem. An original document, say a French article on >> galactic evolution, is to be >> translated into a dozen other languages, from Chinese to Swahili. As thi= s >> project would be >> implemented now, it would turn into a dozen separate translation tasks, >> each performed by its >> own bilingual expert, or team of experts, if as many as a dozen could be >> found. But with Loglan >> as the translation medium, the project would be transformed into >> essentially one task: translation >> of the French document into Loglan. Admittedly this would require human >> effort aided by >> whatever computer algorithms the agency had developed for this purpose. >> But the resulting >> Loglan document could then be more or less instantly retranslated into >> almost any number of >> other natural tongues, and this second step could in principle be >> performed, and so eventually in >> practice, by machines. >> >> >> *1.7 Loglan in Information Storage and Retrieval* >> >> Another not quite so incidental by-product of using Loglan as a >> translation medium would be >> that the Loglan texts so created would be well-adapted for the machine >> storage and retrieval of >> the information they contained. For one of the same reasons that Loglan >> Is suitable at the >> interface, namely that knowledge stored in the predicate notation is >> apparently usable by both >> machines and humans, texts translated into Loglan and stored on some >> electronic medium could >> later be searched and even studied by machines. The studying Machines >> would be computers >> "trained", i.e., programmed in the AI style, in the human art of >> scholarly reading. Although key >> words and Phrases can be searched for now, and in texts written in any >> language, natural >> language texts cannot yet be understood by computers in this way. >> Once again Loglan yields a special benefit because its grammar is >> transparent and its meanings >> clear. >> >> >> *1.8 Loglan as a Planetary Second Language* >> >> Although Loglan was not designed for this bright future, it may >> nevertheless have attributes that fit it for the job. >> >> >> *1.9 Loglan as a Linguistic Toy* >> >> This is the perspective from which Loglan is seen by many individuals, >> not as a >> research tool, not as contribution to the machine-man interface, not as = a >> candidate for the >> international auxiliary, but as a delightful and very human toy. >> >> >> >> >> So out of all this, what are officially the goals of lojban? >> >> Thanks >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s >> "lojban" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n >> email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s >> "lojban" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n >> email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >> >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> >> -- > 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 > email 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. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > --=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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --f46d043be1e2fb1d1c04fca8148c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hm, i can't see syntactic unambiguity in the list of y= our goals.
Does this mean lojban aims not only for syntactic but for se= mantic unambiguity as well?
Does lojban have a goal of a semantic= regularization and if yes then to what extent? I can see that e.g. the pla= ce structure of words for animals is more or less homogeneous.

Does Lojban aims for being a metalanguage in future mac= hine translation applications?
Does this eventually mean it is su= pposed to be an auxiliary language in that you write in Lojban, and your te= xt is automatically translated into high quality texts in other languages?<= /div>



2014-06-25 15:47 GMT+04:00 Andrew Browne <dersaidin@gmail.com>:

Thanks, PC. <= span style=3D"font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)= ;white-space:pre-wrap;line-height:18px;background-color:transparent">Your b= log post makes a convincing argument that being unambiguous, or what you ar= e calling "monoparsing" (you are the only hit on google for this = term, so I'll stick to the conventional terminology), is lojban's m= ost distinguishing feature, but I do not think that it answers the question= of goals.

=

To summ= arize your unofficial response, the goals are:

1) to= be a usable language

2) to be unambiguous

3) to be able to be mapped to a symbolic logic expression


I think= 1) and 2) are well stated goals. They are clear and simple, making it easy= to see if they are being met or not.

= Your go= als 2) and 3) seem like instrumental goals, rather than terminal goals.

=


<= br>

= When I = posted the question, I tried to gather references, but avoid posting any in= terpretation of them since my interpretation is not relevant to the questio= n of the official stance.

=


Since the discussion is turning unofficial, I=E2=80=99ll offer my o= pinion. These are the bits in the references that I think/hope/expect best = describe the goals:

=

&= quot;enhancing the measurable perfo= rmance of its learners"

=E2=80=9Clanguage limit= s thought.=E2=80=9C=

=E2=80=9Ctake the suspected l= imits off, more precisely,= to push them outward in some direction"

=E2=80=9Cextremely logical.=E2=80=9D



To stat= e the goals in my own words:

=

The goa= l of lojban is to be a usable language which enhances thought.

- maximize facility for logical thought: clear, sound, consistent rea= soning

- minimize limitations on thought


What do= we mean by =E2=80=9Clogical=E2=80=9D?:

- clarity is logical

- consistency and regularity is logical

- being systematic is logical

- being objective and unbiased is logical


What ar= e limitations on thought?:

- relative difficulty expressing relatively simple concepts

- not allowing vagueness is a limitation; vagueness reduces limit of = minimal precision

- ambiguity is a limitation on clarity


Note: T= he goal of lojban is not to test the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. However this h= ypothesis inspired lojban=E2=80=99s goals and lojban should be ideal for te= sting it.


Note: S= ome people may advocate being =E2=80=9Crational=E2=80=9D over =E2=80=9Clogi= cal=E2=80=9D. The term =E2=80=9Crational=E2=80=9D is not used in the goal s= tatement with the view that; logical thought is required to evaluate and ch= oose rational actions.


Note: A= mbiguousness is multiple possible distinct/unrelated meanings. Vagueness is= a single meaning, expressed with less precision.



I think many of the instrumental goals and design fea= tures derive from these goals.


Stuff m= y goals (and notes) do not cover:

= - Does = =E2=80=9Cenhances thought=E2=80=9D apply to learners, speakers, or thinkers= ? Is it still expected to apply when they are not speaking/thinking in lojb= an?

= - Shoul= d the definition mention simplicity (or avoiding unnecessary compl= exity) as an aspect of being logical? is that part of clarity? =E2=80=9CSim= plicity is the ultimate sophistication."

= - Stabi= lity and backwards compatibility; is this part of usability?<= /p>

= - The n= eed?/goal? to specify/document much/all of the language.

=

Other i= nteresting points for this definition:

= - Viewi= ng a team of people/computers as a single entity, communication within that= entity is part of thought. Communication as language may even be necessary= within one brain (that is my unsupported speculation).

=



Discussion aside, I stil= l hope for an official answer to the question - and I think it is an import= ant question deserving of one.

= Officially, what are the goals of lojban?


Thanks,

<= /div>
Andrew =C2=A0/ =C2=A0DerSaidin




On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 3:54:48 AM UTC+10, clifford wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border= -left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">


=

VERY unofficially, the goal of Lojban is to have= a usable language which is syntactically unambiguous, that is, is such tha= t every grammatical utterance has a unique and correct parse (monoparsing, = for short). =C2=A0If it is not meeting this goal, Lojban is unduly complex = for meeting whatever other goals it may have (all of which are met more eff= iciently by other constructed languages, most by even, say, toki pona). =C2= =A0Lojban has some reason to claim that it meets this goal, at least that i= t has a grammar that gives a unique parse to each grammatical sentence. Wha= t is less clearly demonstrated is that this parse is always correct in the = sense that it maps directly onto a unique formula of symbolic logic, though= this appears likely, given the care which has been devoted to details that such a mapping would involve=C2=A0


On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:= 54 AM, Andrew Browne <ders...@gmail.com> wrote:



What are the official goals of lojban?


It is important to have an understanding of the goals for ongoing work (finishing BPFK sections, etc.), otherwise w= e will end up with stuff that is inconsistent.
I think many peopl= e involved have an implicit understanding of the goals, due to having been around much longer, and/or closely involved in BPFK.
<= div>
I am after an official clear statement of= goals for lojban (or reference to one), for the benefit of those of us who= have not been around for so long (and clarification for everyone else).



The best source I can find is the CLL:

The goals for the language were first described in= the open literature in the article =E2=80=9CLoglan=E2=80=9D, published in = Scientific American, June, 1960.
=C2=A0
The following are the main features of Lojban:
Lojban is designed to be used by people in communication with each other,= and possibly in the future with computers.
Lojban is designed to be neutral between cultures.
Lojban= grammar is based on the principles of predicate logic.
L= ojban has an unambiguous yet flexible grammar.
Lojban has= phonetic spelling, and unambiguously resolves its sounds into words.
Lojban is simple compared to natural languages; it is easy to learn.
Lojban=E2=80=99s 1300 root words can be easily combined to form= a vocabulary of millions of words.
Lojban is regular; th= e rules of the language are without exceptions.
Lojban attempts to remove restrictions on creative and clear thought and communication.
Lojban has a variety of uses, ranging fro= m the creative to the scientific, from the theoretical to the practical.Lojban has been demonstrated in translation and in original works of prose and poetry.



I a= lso found some other materials with similar lists of features, and a simila= r reference to the goals of TLI Loglan:


There has = also been some discussion of goals on this list:






Several of these sources have reference= d the goals of TLI Loglan.
So what are the goals of TLI Loglan?

Note; I'm quoting the bits I think are possibly re= levant to my question of goals, trying to provide a helpful summary.
Please read more of = these documents to get more context or to add anything else I missed.
=



First, lets look in that 1960 Scientific American Article mentio= ned earlier:

It was to supply an instrument for experimental in= vestigation of the Leibniz-Whorf hypothesis that we undertook our work on L= oglan in 1955.
Loglan was to be an artificial language, but one especially designed to test the thesis that the structure of language determines the forms of thought.
It was to have= a small, easily learned vocabulary derived from the word stock of as many = of the major natural languages as proved feasible (though it was not intend= ed to be an auxiliary international language).
Its rules of grammar and syntax were to be as few and regular as possible.<= br clear=3D"none">It was to utilize a short list of speech sounds (phonemes= ) common to the natural languages [see table on opposite page], and it was = to be phonetically spelled.
=C2=A0
But most important, Loglan was to incorporate as m= any of the notational devices of modern logic and mathematics as could be a= dapted to its use.=C2=A0




The other good source I = found on TLI Loglan is this book, Loglan1 (which appears to me to be the TLI Log= lan equivalent of CLL):


1.1 The Scientific Strategy
=
Logla= n is a language which was originally devised to test the Sapir-Whorf hypoth= esis
that the structure of language determines the boundaries of human thought.<= /blockquote>

The most promising way to create such a difference, it seemed to me, was to= exaggerate some=C2=A0
natural function of human language= , that is, to increase the functional adequacy of some complex=C2=A0
of linguistic structures in a way that would have a strong independent like= lihood of enhancing=C2=A0
the measurable performance of i= ts learners on some specified set of tasks. Besides, in its original=C2=A0<= br clear=3D"none"> formulation the Whorf hypothesis is a negative one: language limits thought= . One way of=C2=A0
disclosing such phenomena is to take t= he suspected limits off, more precisely, to push them=C2=A0
outward in some direction in which removing limits would have predictabl= e effects. So it was=C2=A0
settled. The diminutive language should also be a functionally extreme one in some known or=C2=A0
presum= able way: an extremely poetic one, say, or an extremely efficient one, or extremely=C2=A0
logical.

1.2 Loglan as a Logical Language
But the claim invested in this metaphor is in fact narrower than the wide= =C2=A0
word 'logical' suggests. Loglan is logical= only in the sense of purporting to facilitate certain=C2=A0
limited kinds of thought: namely those kinds which proceed by the trans= formation of sentences=C2=A0
into other sentences in such a way that if the first are true so also are t= he second. We might
also expect it to minimize, or help p= revent, the errors that are usually made in performing such=C2=A0
deductive operations. But these are fairly modest senses of the word 'l= ogical'. We might have=C2=A0
meant to convey by it the much stronger claim= that Loglan is a deductive system, in the sense=C2=A0
that geometry and formal logic are. To s= upport such a claim we would have had to show that=C2=A0
= Loglan had a set of elementary notions and elementary operations from which= all its complex=C2=A0
notions and complex operations had been rigorously derived. But we do not m= ake this claim.

1.3 Logla= n as a Laboratory Instrument
Apart from the thought-facilitating functions of Loglan, the language is al= so meant to be a=C2=A0
manageable laboratory instrument: = teachable, measurable, controllable; its structure transparently=C2=A0
observable both at the moment of introduction into any experiment and in co= ntinuous change

But Loglan does seem to be eas= ily learned,11 and on every formal parameter it is agreeably small.
The number of its grammar rules is an order of magnitude less than has come= to be expected of natural grammars from recent work.

While the size of a language is not the only factor that determines the spe= ed with which it is learned, it is=C2=A0
undoubtedly an i= mportant one; and all my early teaching trials have suggested that Loglan i= s indeed very rapidly learned.

Another feature of the language that reflects its = intended use as a laboratory instrument is its cultural neutrality.

1.4 Loglan in the Artificial Intellig= ence Laboratory
Loglan grammar is not only known but already written in a machine-parsable = code. So it is itself the beginning of an AI program.

Besides, if the partial grammars now in hand are any indication,=C2=A0
when a complete grammar of a natural human language is finally written, = it will be far too large=C2=A0
for programmatic manipulation in the AI lab. Natural languages are very large = affairs.

Thus, more than anything else it is the small size, formal completeness and= machine parsability=C2=A0
of Loglan grammar that seem to= suit it for manipulation in the artificial intelligence laboratory.=C2=A0<= /blockquote>

1.5 Loglan at the Machine-Man interfa= ce
...to make the machine-man interface truly comfortable for humans and yet c= ontinue to be instructive
for machines, we need a languag= e in which the requirements of both humans and machines are met.

Loglan may be such a language. W= e have seen that it is utterly unequivocal grammatically. One=C2=A0
consequence is that we humans become aware of what we are actually saying w= hen we talk=C2=A0
Loglan. So a Loglan-speaking human is m= uch less likely to say one thing while meaning another,=C2=A0
thus misinforming his or her machine. Also, as we shall see in the nex= t chapter, Loglan words=C2=A0
resolve uniquely from the speech-stream; no 'I scream'/'Ice cre= am' phenomena exist in it. So even=C2=A0
spoken instr= uctions are unequivocal in Loglan. This is true of no other language. Being= able to=C2=A0
speak freely composed instructions spontaneously would add immeasurably to the speed and=C2=A0
comfort of the interaction for humans, and yet, because it's Loglan, its being spoken would not=C2=A0
diminish its precision for machines.=C2=A0

What do we human partners in this high-powered interaction require? That we= be permitted to=C2=A0
express our thoughts fully, freely= and spontaneously without the risk of seriously misinforming=C2=A0
our machines. That we be able to understand most of the machine's word-= choices and all its=C2=A0
utterance-forms immediately, an= d be able to clarify by interrogation whatever part of the=C2=A0
computer's responses to us we do not immediately understand.<= /blockquote>

1.6 Loglan as a Translation Medium
Consider the problem. An original document, say a French article on galacti= c evolution, is to be=C2=A0
translated into a dozen other= languages, from Chinese to Swahili. As this project would be=C2=A0
implemented now, it would turn into a dozen separate translation tasks, eac= h performed by its=C2=A0
own bilingual expert, or team of= experts, if as many as a dozen could be found. But with Loglan=C2=A0
as the translation medium, the project would be transformed into essentiall= y one task: translation=C2=A0
of the French document into= Loglan. Admittedly this would require human effort aided by=C2=A0
whatever computer algorithms the agency had developed for this purpose. But= the resulting=C2=A0
Loglan document could then be more o= r less instantly retranslated into almost any number of=C2=A0
other natural tongues, and this second step could in principle be performed, and so eventually in=C2=A0
practice, by machines.=C2=A0

=
1.7 Loglan in Information Storage and Retrieval
Another not quite so incidental by-product of using Loglan as a translation= medium would be=C2=A0
that the Loglan texts so created w= ould be well-adapted for the machine storage and retrieval of=C2=A0
the information they contained. For one of the same reasons that Loglan Is = suitable at the=C2=A0
interface, namely that knowledge st= ored in the predicate notation is apparently usable by both=C2=A0
machines and humans, texts translated into Loglan and stored on s= ome electronic medium could=C2=A0
later be searched and even studied by machines. The studying Machines would= be computers=C2=A0
"trained", i.e., programmed in= the AI style, in the human art of scholarly reading. Although key=C2=A0words and Phrases can be searched for now, and in texts wri= tten in any language, natural=C2=A0
language texts cannot yet be understood by computers in this way.=C2=A0
Once again Loglan yields a special benefit because its gramm= ar is transparent and its meanings=C2=A0
clear.

1.8 Loglan as a Planetary Second Language
Although Loglan= was not designed for this bright future, it may nevertheless have attribut= es that fit it for the job.

1.9 Loglan as a Linguistic Toy
This is the perspective from which Loglan is seen by many individu= als, not as a=C2=A0
research tool, not as contribution to the machine-man interface, not as a c= andidate for the=C2=A0
international auxiliary, but as a = delightful and very human toy.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+un...@googlegroups= .com.
To post to this group, send email to loj= ...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/<= u>optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+un...@googlegroups= .com.
To post to this group, send email to loj= ...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/<= u>optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http:= //groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--f46d043be1e2fb1d1c04fca8148c--