Received: from mail-wi0-f187.google.com ([209.85.212.187]:53441) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrSu-0006Tu-JC for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:09 -0800 Received: by mail-wi0-f187.google.com with SMTP id hm9sf1997192wib.4 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -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=FWs1UnQ4uM47KBQS4cue4VHyVeg7nGLWUyp+51KQg3M=; b=d0/9nhyinMijGp/pDXG8zIM95yka+w6bZDdHFWlIcsfGOWzaf+bKW+kyUmps69GXLi MiIlZv0QCYH/BvJjMZZ+dyX3GE2ugwe/k5xIMnXs8Z/Ho/YhmuWqt0gCcXYe1HwtirMH ebDW9jI9eSVVp6PZcRtG2z4Dt+TB9TUtqRJKVrejtLtTnhPAoFrT5pIQ9IGnXVysx4V+ 9onDzaMEuS6iJX2iaKuGN7f09r6VzkyuZRW4y59mJY675FhJ4jvmSInLvxg8jWQgcMD0 4PlhD+HJbpRx/aU91iQEQJ5Jnl4tNw+lRuap/IM1aKIwEh6EviGBJ5Sr7VCC2ORcBAYb Q5xw== X-Received: by 10.180.20.176 with SMTP id o16mr11185wie.15.1422547021611; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.103.71 with SMTP id fu7ls152058wib.29.canary; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.93.165 with SMTP id cv5mr211180wib.6.1422547021156; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -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 i10si183024wiz.0.2015.01.29.07.57.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -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 n3so28144912wiv.1 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:01 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.101.73 with SMTP id fe9mr2409847wib.15.1422547020977; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:57:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.86.200 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:56:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <441592822.1242464.1422477652226.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:56:39 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Questions about Lojban To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d041826b6dc9e02050dcc899f 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 18:20 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : > > On 29 Jan 2015 10:48, "Gleki Arxokuna" wrote: > > > > > > > > 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? > > I don't know if I understand your question. > > > Isn't it easier to state that "-ing" attaches to uncertain heads just > like {calonu zo'e} does in Lojban ? > > No. The three syntactic structures I describe are independently warranted; > they're not invented just to account for this sentence's ambiguity. > Sometimes syntactically different sentences just happen to have the same > phonology; that's the very definition of ambiguity. > You have a sentence. You interpret it. After this interpretation you call it ambiguous. [...] 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) [209.85.212.187 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 --f46d041826b6dc9e02050dcc899f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2015-01-29 18:20 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : > > On 29 Jan 2015 10:48, "Gleki Arxokuna" wrote: > > > > > > > > 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? > > I don't know if I understand your question. > > > Isn't it easier to state that "-ing" attaches to uncertain heads just > like {calonu zo'e} does in Lojban ? > > No. The three syntactic structures I describe are independently warranted; > they're not invented just to account for this sentence's ambiguity. > Sometimes syntactically different sentences just happen to have the same > phonology; that's the very definition of ambiguity. > You have a sentence. You interpret it. After this interpretation you call it ambiguous. But this is how Lojban sentence works as well. {ca lo nu se xi vei mo'e zo'e} after the interpretation leads us to the conclusion that: {mo'e zo'e} can take the value 1 or 2. They are not invented just to account for this sentence's ambiguity. And I disagree that the English sentence has any ambiguity by itself. After you interpret it - then yes. But that's exactly what happens to the Lojban sentence as well. And one may call the two interpretations of Lojban sentence as having the same phonology. This would be idiotic indeed but valid. > -- > 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. > -- 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. --f46d041826b6dc9e02050dcc899f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= 2015-01-29 18:20 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>= :


On 29 Jan 2015 10:48, "Gleki Arxokuna" <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>= ; wrote:
>
>
>
> 2015-01-29 13:25 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.co= m> 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@googlegroups.com>:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> There are clearly two valid parses for the Englis= h.=C2=A0
>>>> >
>>>> > 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 contro= lled subject; in a second, it is "object complement" (predicate i= n 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 diffe= rent parses due to ambiguity of the syntactic tree?
>>
>> =C2=A0
>> Yes.
>
>
> Where this ambiguity arises?

I don't know if I understand your question.<= /p>

> Isn't it easier to state that "-ing" atta= ches to uncertain heads just like {calonu zo'e} does in Lojban ?

No. The three syntactic structures I describe are ind= ependently warranted; they're not invented just to account for this sen= tence's ambiguity. Sometimes syntactically different sentences just hap= pen to have the same phonology; that's the very definition of ambiguity= .

You have a sentence.
You interp= ret it.
After this interpretation you call it ambiguous.

But this is how Lojban sentence works as well.
=
{ca lo nu se xi vei mo'e zo'e} =C2=A0after the interpretation = leads us to the conclusion that:
{mo'e zo'e} can take= the value 1 or 2.

They are not invented just = to account for this sentence's ambiguity.

And = I disagree that the English sentence has any ambiguity by itself. After you= interpret it - then yes. But that's exactly what happens to the Lojban= sentence as well.

And one may call the two interp= retations of Lojban sentence as having the same phonology. This would be id= iotic indeed but valid.

--
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.
--f46d041826b6dc9e02050dcc899f--