Received: from mail-la0-f64.google.com ([209.85.215.64]:39074) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YIh8W-00083j-J2 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:41 -0800 Received: by mail-la0-f64.google.com with SMTP id gm9sf3360644lab.9 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -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=NUAXbvSJ//raKswW+GidRVIT7W7Qbea0IY1a6lPGW50=; b=EC5saDTib65q4sSg6O5W7ZGP7ppmJJxSxhATKojJpunuclDsCtJIRpVia1UbGO5kBs EePtV2kwF1mSv1IX25OSpxx4lu/7Nt5tnNZoxewaLgIg4zn4WWppO4/gTm1Kj7tUeSvU BoR5z1Apxka7FiVBHm4OT1Ahtt17uiS1xbC7pxcD35u6MWafpK4s6E3XVLBEYpmCRUrB jnkgTR7uvTrSIDwAbFmAWiX/47l+hSSDCdva5tFDzhtcd7WFpR47d3wMemf9wZL8sZzV CfkjrwGT1MWuietvZU2+2Lil/NaYwLDEQ4lgLel3zblxeemhlxRLwuU5NJp7Z52giK/F 60Hw== X-Received: by 10.180.103.163 with SMTP id fx3mr132958wib.6.1422983973644; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.102.131 with SMTP id fo3ls956245wib.39.canary; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.194.201.10 with SMTP id jw10mr3277962wjc.3.1422983973111; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-x232.google.com (mail-lb0-x232.google.com. [2a00:1450:4010:c04::232]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id mv2si88461lbc.0.2015.02.03.09.19.33 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of selckiku@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::232 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::232; Received: by mail-lb0-x232.google.com with SMTP id u10so39847736lbd.9 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:33 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.152.198.164 with SMTP id jd4mr2039509lac.4.1422983972998; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:19:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.139.71 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 09:19:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Stela Selckiku Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 12:19:01 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] the myth of monoparsing To: lojban@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11348d3a3b52f9050e32460a X-Original-Sender: selckiku@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of selckiku@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::232 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=selckiku@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: I don't understand at all how a Lojban sentence carefully phrased to explicitly state a particular ambiguity seems to you to share any similar basic character at all with an English sentence which has a similar ambiguity simply by randomly having a chaotic collection of ambiguities as all English sentences do. In Lojban you're able to unambiguously craft exactly the ambiguity which matches any English ambiguity, which is rather astonishingly impressive, better than anyone expected it to work before we'd really tried it. It's not that Lojban's required not to have ambiguities, or something, it's that you can state whatever ambiguities you want. [...] 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_H2 RBL: Average reputation (+2) [209.85.215.64 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 (selckiku[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 --001a11348d3a3b52f9050e32460a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I don't understand at all how a Lojban sentence carefully phrased to explicitly state a particular ambiguity seems to you to share any similar basic character at all with an English sentence which has a similar ambiguity simply by randomly having a chaotic collection of ambiguities as all English sentences do. In Lojban you're able to unambiguously craft exactly the ambiguity which matches any English ambiguity, which is rather astonishingly impressive, better than anyone expected it to work before we'd really tried it. It's not that Lojban's required not to have ambiguities, or something, it's that you can state whatever ambiguities you want. Try going the other way and matching the exact ambiguities from arbitrary Lojban sentences in English and then say again you don't see the difference. You can't just make an English sentence have exactly the ambiguities you want in order to match some other language's ambiguity structures, in English you have to crush together words with zillions of parses and just hope context is enough to pick out the sense you meant. Lojban isn't some rigid set of rules where you just get a few fixed parses or something, it's a wonderful magical flexible set of rules where you get to choose exactly what you want to express and what you don't. <3, selkik -- 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. --001a11348d3a3b52f9050e32460a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I don't understand at all how a Lojban sentence carefu= lly phrased to explicitly state a particular ambiguity seems to you to shar= e any similar basic character at all with an English sentence which has a s= imilar ambiguity simply by randomly having a chaotic collection of ambiguit= ies as all English sentences do. In Lojban you're able to unambiguously= craft exactly the ambiguity which matches any English ambiguity, which is = rather astonishingly impressive, better than anyone expected it to work bef= ore we'd really tried it. It's not that Lojban's required not t= o have ambiguities, or something, it's that you can state whatever ambi= guities you want.

Try going the other way and matching the exact am= biguities from arbitrary Lojban sentences in English and then say again you= don't see the difference. You can't just make an English sentence = have exactly the ambiguities you want in order to match some other language= 's ambiguity structures, in English you have to crush together words wi= th zillions of parses and just hope context is enough to pick out the sense= you meant. Lojban isn't some rigid set of rules where you just get a f= ew fixed parses or something, it's a wonderful magical flexible set of = rules where you get to choose exactly what you want to express and what you= don't.

<3,
selkik

--
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.
--001a11348d3a3b52f9050e32460a--