Received: from mail-lb0-f183.google.com ([209.85.217.183]:37914) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YGmeh-0002B1-UR for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:49:01 -0800 Received: by mail-lb0-f183.google.com with SMTP id f15sf2754956lbj.0 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type: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; bh=nXXL+1jtcwCfyaNByGJua3tXejc8oLGjh8DKYpMT8Ck=; b=ygGLaMixCEBbbKo6eNGuwvB5Wyd2MKk3orkCLS05z/+4vn+BzyeY/QdKTqCXyW3dkM IySGwGqM15IhYXsr1i+CVW503p8l2ptH4ycY5lmXQwumfmb1OfA1BHuFL2bnH9xJBmyW P+5okKHlbUhOUvFn+kOKSB9W26mf5OfIlXbAvU9w/Q9Qx4JjC7oD9Heh54gwel6Db5Wz vpxIAO8j77DHKTsRYfFJ41eXwnlq0iSs8jIND0oTE89M2seAJOvun2I2EwqvSguxXrZf Dsjm1D2vkXu/lGV1MBwfNexM544cf61wzcBykcgO5++IhEAsrtObljNpQ8AjqTqGnCh3 8ZRA== X-Received: by 10.152.29.201 with SMTP id m9mr162065lah.13.1422528532901; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:52 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.205.11 with SMTP id lc11ls36963lac.19.gmail; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:52 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.112.64.171 with SMTP id p11mr1637123lbs.12.1422528532085; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id jv2si110158wid.1.2015.01.29.02.48.52 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e; Received: by mail-wi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id n3so24261420wiv.1 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:51 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.20.177 with SMTP id o17mr420178wie.64.1422528531844; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.86.200 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 02:48:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <441592822.1242464.1422477652226.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:48:31 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Questions about Lojban To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec53d5b4bd2d43e050dc83b38 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:c05::22e 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: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) 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: 2015-01-29 13:25 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Gleki Arxokuna < > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> 2015-01-29 10:35 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : >> >>> >>> On 29 Jan 2015 06:38, "Gleki Arxokuna" >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > 2015-01-28 23:40 GMT+03:00 'John E Clifford' via lojban < >>> lojban@googlegroups.com>: >>> >> >>> >> There are clearly two valid parses for the English. >>> > >>> > Why are you saying that the English sentence has two parses? >>> >>> Because it does have two (in fact, three) parses. In one, "flying" is an >>> adverbial adjunct (of "saw") with controlled subject; in a second, it is >>> "object complement" (predicate in a small-clausal complement of "saw"); in >>> a third, it is adjunct of "plane". >>> >> >> Of course, this can be a rival explanation but are those different parses >> due to ambiguity of the syntactic tree? >> > > Yes. > [...] 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 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.217.183 listed in wl.mailspike.net] 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 (gleki.is.my.name[at]gmail.com) 0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is CUSTOM_MED 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 --bcaec53d5b4bd2d43e050dc83b38 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2015-01-29 13:25 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Gleki Arxokuna < > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> 2015-01-29 10:35 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : >> >>> >>> On 29 Jan 2015 06:38, "Gleki Arxokuna" >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > 2015-01-28 23:40 GMT+03:00 'John E Clifford' via lojban < >>> lojban@googlegroups.com>: >>> >> >>> >> There are clearly two valid parses for the English. >>> > >>> > Why are you saying that the English sentence has two parses? >>> >>> Because it does have two (in fact, three) parses. In one, "flying" is an >>> adverbial adjunct (of "saw") with controlled subject; in a second, it is >>> "object complement" (predicate in a small-clausal complement of "saw"); in >>> a third, it is adjunct of "plane". >>> >> >> Of course, this can be a rival explanation but are those different parses >> due to ambiguity of the syntactic tree? >> > > Yes. > Where this ambiguity arises? Isn't it easier to state that "-ing" attaches to uncertain heads just like {calonu zo'e} does in Lojban ? -- 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. --bcaec53d5b4bd2d43e050dc83b38 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2015-01-29 13:25 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:

On Thu, Jan 29, 20= 15 at 7:58 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>= wrote:


2015-01-29 10:35 GMT+03:00= And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:


On 29 Jan 2015 06:38, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>= ; wrote:
>
>
>
> 2015-01-28 23:40 GMT+03:00 'John E Clifford' via lojban <lojban@googlegro= ups.com>:
>>
 >> There are clearly two valid parses for the English.=C2=A0
>
 > Why are you saying that the English sentence has two parses?

Because it does have two (in fact, three) parses. In one, &q= uot;flying" is an adverbial adjunct (of "saw") with controll= ed subject; in a second, it is "object complement" (predicate in = a small-clausal complement of "saw"); in a third, it is adjunct o= f "plane".


Of cou= rse, this can be a rival explanation but are those different parses due to = ambiguity of the syntactic tree?
= =C2=A0
Yes.

<= /div>
Where this ambiguity arises? Isn't it easier to state that &q= uot;-ing" attaches to uncertain heads just like {calonu zo'e} does= in Lojban ?

--
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.
--bcaec53d5b4bd2d43e050dc83b38--