Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO7bV+ix=cVsFnN4Q8xsDwUjs4Uu3dkD4=uyriyWKs7=gpxbHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <63c70fb2-f85a-49bf-8bac-848e04682b3a@googlegroups.com>
	<1434464239.890000.1422398168059.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
	<CAO7bV+gi0vqEv2i=x6ooKVOePEPdBp_a7vVcDfRWn5S9YUje6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<54C8DABC.9030307@gmail.com>
	<CAO7bV+iqxS94pPGtw3TBj99OzXKsf=jaEWWL2OLeanbxgfT7bQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2dEqjAz1cRXHO_s5rog1nVjxyUCga2QttkzCmJh=AoRZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7bV+ix=cVsFnN4Q8xsDwUjs4Uu3dkD4=uyriyWKs7=gpxbHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:26:13 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2dtM1nLPQECuDHjisNQJRCy1JJ-VLTDdA-ph=DjU_7Y5g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Questions about Lojban
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f8389d1c5922b050db650c3
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: 0.8
X-Spam_score_int: 8
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
 
 Content preview:  On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com
    > wrote: > > How can {lo se xi vei pa a re no'a} be monoparsed in pragmatic
    terms? It > still has two readings. > It has a single parse. One that involves
    a disjunction. [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.8 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  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]
  2.7 DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL    RBL: Envelope sender listed in dnsbl.ahbl.org
                             [listed in googlegroups.com.rhsbl.ahbl.org.	IN]
                             [A]
  0.0 T_HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail
                             domains are different
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
                             (jjllambias[at]gmail.com)
  0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED   No valid author signature, adsp_override is
                             CUSTOM_MED
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3      RBL: Good reputation (+3)
                             [209.85.212.188 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
 -1.9 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
                             [score: 0.0000]
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
  0.0 T_FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN 2nd level domains in From and
                             EnvelopeFrom freemail headers are different
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders

--e89a8f8389d1c5922b050db650c3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com
> wrote:

>
> How can {lo se xi vei pa a re no'a} be monoparsed in pragmatic terms? It
> still has two readings.
>

It has a single parse. One that involves a disjunction.


> {mi prami do} still has zillions of readings including {mi ba'o prami do}
> and {mi ba zu ze'i ru'i prami do}.
>

Not really, it only expresses the relation "prami" between two arguments
"mi" and "do", basically P{m,d) in FOPL notation. There's no syntactic
ambiguity. The wikipedia article on ambiguity discusses the distinction
between ambiguity and vagueness, as well as different types of ambiguity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguity

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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.

--e89a8f8389d1c5922b050db650c3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gleki.is.my=
.name@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:r=
gb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">=
<div><br></div><div>How can {lo se xi vei pa a re no&#39;a} be monoparsed i=
n pragmatic terms? It still has two readings.</div></div></blockquote><div>=
<br></div><div>It has a single parse. One that involves a disjunction.</div=
><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px=
 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-=
left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>{mi prami do} stil=
l has zillions of readings including {mi ba&#39;o prami do} and {mi ba zu z=
e&#39;i ru&#39;i prami do}.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Not=
 really, it only expresses the relation &quot;prami&quot; between two argum=
ents &quot;mi&quot; and &quot;do&quot;, basically P{m,d) in FOPL notation. =
There&#39;s no syntactic ambiguity. The wikipedia article on ambiguity disc=
usses the distinction between ambiguity and vagueness, as well as different=
 types of ambiguity: <a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguity">htt=
p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambiguity</a></div><div><br></div><div>mu&#39;o m=
i&#39;e xorxes</div><div><br></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 <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--e89a8f8389d1c5922b050db650c3--