Received: from mail-wg0-f60.google.com ([74.125.82.60]:45963) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YK8Xx-0001UE-P9 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:54 -0800 Received: by mail-wg0-f60.google.com with SMTP id x13sf2897447wgg.5 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:47 -0800 (PST) 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 :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=ADdpNqLV0WVhxpILodd4/13It9oO0Tkq4XEZoHJV5xI=; b=uW5nrFwaf4XwWinOkUhyY187+AQDk1r3rUCO1pKc77KAuFe0kpcodTdrfHkJMulsis fPlY9/VnH67TbTw3leG5mNsZaDwiUMy8hYZeMEzOjG3d1DNTp/NgZsvWHjrRLk4OzIZM sWFjgAUy7rbK5b1uiQ60VuI8DBBGdlTtArAKUOERdl1YuLSOzXCRbrJJtDwohQnbypF9 f/iHMWV6B5pIT4FFGbiY4yIeehn6OGSY/XfbA7oddlVy9sUlLjxT7cRkM0XbDfxCGWio cyKZ6B4DYkDwjyZ4e71BlfR6nkxGfhlond5N81b4CjLy5C1La8qoX7xqEH3KWcUZ26XF Q0uA== X-Received: by 10.152.241.7 with SMTP id we7mr79098lac.24.1423327667043; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:47 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.5.199 with SMTP id u7ls396440lau.63.gmail; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:46 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.112.163.42 with SMTP id yf10mr1053730lbb.8.1423327666354; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com (mail-we0-x230.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l18si473954wiv.1.2015.02.07.08.47.46 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:46 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::230 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c03::230; Received: by mail-we0-x230.google.com with SMTP id p10so7651585wes.7 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.91.13 with SMTP id ca13mr2184448wib.7.1423327666218; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 08:47:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.27.132.70 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 08:47:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.27.132.70 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 08:47:45 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <0CD5A578A47549238B8B046A01B8846C@gmail.com> <54BCFC70.2010805@selpahi.de> <54BE4E4F.1060204@gmail.com> <54BEE656.9090807@gmail.com> <54BFC0F4.1010600@gmail.com> <54D31D5E.6070907@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 16:47:45 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [Llg-members] nu ningau so'u se jbovlaste / updating a few jbovlaste entries From: And Rosta To: lojban@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043d6713f1af21050e824b0f X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::230 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@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: On 6 Feb 2015 21:10, "Jorge Llambías" wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:36 AM, And Rosta wrote: >> >> On 5 Feb 2015 21:14, "Jorge Llambías" wrote: >> > >> > First I'd have to know what English is, in order to compare, >> >> So although you're not sure what it is, you have an idea of what it is that is good enough for you to know what it isn't? > > Yes, but that's not saying much. I know it's not a dishwasher or a lawn mower for example. [...] 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) [74.125.82.60 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 (and.rosta[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 --f46d043d6713f1af21050e824b0f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 6 Feb 2015 21:10, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:36 AM, And Rosta wrote: >> >> On 5 Feb 2015 21:14, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" wrote: >> > >> > First I'd have to know what English is, in order to compare, >> >> So although you're not sure what it is, you have an idea of what it is that is good enough for you to know what it isn't? > > Yes, but that's not saying much. I know it's not a dishwasher or a lawn mower for example. Still, you also think you know it's not what I think it is, which I think requires a fuller degree of knowledge than knowing it's not a dishwasher does. >> >> > but it seems unlikely that English is the same as a full explication of its rules. >> >> How about if English is the same as a full explication of a family of sets of rules, one set per idiolect? Or you feel that even an idiolect is not the same as a full explication of its rules? Is the game of chess different from a full explication of its rules? If Yes, is that because there are many different possible explications, or because chess, like tigers, is very different from a set of rules? > > I can accept that the game of chess is fully described by its rules. But even for an idiolect, it doesn't seem likely that a finite set of rules would describe it, Do have a sense of where the problem lies? You accept that some explications are better than others, but think no single explication can be solely right. So could you accept that a family of similar explications could be right? What about Lojban? What's the relationship between it and an explication of it? Is it more like English or more like chess? --And. --=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. --f46d043d6713f1af21050e824b0f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 6 Feb 2015 21:10, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:36 AM, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 5 Feb 2015 21:14, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > First I'd have to know what English is, in order to compa= re,
>>
>> So although you're not sure what it is, you have an idea of wh= at it is that is good enough for you to know what it isn't?
>
> Yes, but that's not saying much. I know it's not a dishwasher = or a lawn mower for example.

Still, you also think you know it's not what I think it = is, which I think requires a fuller degree of knowledge than knowing it'= ;s not a dishwasher does.

>>
>> > but it seems unlikely that English is the same as a full expl= ication of its rules.=C2=A0
>>
>> How about if English is the same as a full explication of a family= of sets of rules, one set per idiolect? Or you feel that even an idiolect = is not the same as a full explication of its rules? Is the game of chess di= fferent from a full explication of its rules? If Yes, is that because there= are many different possible explications, or because chess, like tigers, i= s very different from a set of rules?
>
> I can accept that the game of chess is fully described by its rules. B= ut even for an idiolect, it doesn't seem likely that a finite set of ru= les would describe it,

Do have a sense of where the problem lies?

You accept that some explications are better than others, bu= t think no single explication can be solely right. So could you accept that= a family of similar explications could be right?

What about Lojban? What's the relationship between it an= d an explication of it? Is it more like English or more like chess?

--And.

--
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.
--f46d043d6713f1af21050e824b0f--