Received: from mail-oi0-f64.google.com ([209.85.218.64]:37756) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YKGlQ-000418-9G for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:34:21 -0800 Received: by mail-oi0-f64.google.com with SMTP id a141sf2670457oig.9 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:34:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=GhgpR6Q0RPzqKI5z7TN4K7QnIE+rIJg2VqKf/tIh0ms=; b=TEOOFATtQONf/VtqK2zdSUZXuQHnZZ8l6hF7wgBa8+1b57p0HYI41DZtZa9wLRSFBn 12Zu3rLvow+XtDAmZJheeaohpV1m/xzMdd6e73TXUZW6XLj9usZHXFKjPBmvZ9dnKmKy j/Z5axQLTyLZmTS9wTHbRTamjUQBv570t5foVMk0D8XuZvhWbVV9pC/lNoHSNvdlDLKX ourdVY3ExGYnDb6gkeJijjiKYBCNpCW/ewXt4kK/Td7UiEDgV4cQ8HNy1/GU6RccVD/6 E1WG0cvOdduYSZCSajSAtG1tADBupl3DmC5w956rWYZkaGHOfGUvZKZNmm9rNXhL5cKs Lz4g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=GhgpR6Q0RPzqKI5z7TN4K7QnIE+rIJg2VqKf/tIh0ms=; b=cfhf/YReQ3oIZEEhSjWkHakKdT0j/uCOt+c4YbxeqwsVSYV1Wsc5vLc2v9rExebWyQ JljzaxCESPPfquNe/iNPZ0Xws2pLxxqBSCYfjZxwkyCLm+benmmeiAmy5WYYHUPub7sG udRykEOJ84zmgbAApSwhV3W9KuztYVYakKxvZOwcGLv9Fg0kBae+JsLffOSI3s3X/ZP2 MqUSYj30fzumqkQfwgPMQHoT+jYveKGARQ5dpaXBPSTdNYcYDYDjyPTvJxx5exgdrIue g3qI1bHfr0THNywzdjb2yvvnrNPGyFjwnpaGRUWdvYyCt6XQeOhYjz3vmjrZEwJHyks7 nf3w== X-Received: by 10.140.38.116 with SMTP id s107mr115518qgs.19.1423359253857; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:34:13 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.90.36 with SMTP id w33ls1853113qgd.0.gmail; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:34:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.98.172 with SMTP id o41mr100108qge.34.1423359253629; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 17:34:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 17:34:13 -0800 (PST) From: ianek To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20150204124517.GA1243@kuebelreiter.informatik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE> Subject: Re: [lojban] the myth of monoparsing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_638_1420212553.1423359253100" X-Original-Sender: janek37@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: 0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.7 X-Spam_score_int: 7 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 Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:13:30 AM UTC+1, la gleki wrote: > > > > 2015-02-04 15:45 GMT+03:00 v4hn >: > >> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:42:32AM +0300, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: >> > "Fred saw a plane flying over Zurich" can have several meanings >> >> Yes. >> However, for me, the issue here is that we (hopefully..) agree >> that there are different parse trees (which yield the different meanings). >> > > No, several trees arise after you interpret the sentence. > [...] Content analysis details: (0.7 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) [209.85.218.64 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 (janek37[at]gmail.com) 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_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 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 ------=_Part_638_1420212553.1423359253100 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_639_231641866.1423359253100" ------=_Part_639_231641866.1423359253100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:13:30 AM UTC+1, la gleki wrote: > > > > 2015-02-04 15:45 GMT+03:00 v4hn >: > >> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 11:42:32AM +0300, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: >> > "Fred saw a plane flying over Zurich" can have several meanings >> >> Yes. >> However, for me, the issue here is that we (hopefully..) agree >> that there are different parse trees (which yield the different meanings). >> > > No, several trees arise after you interpret the sentence. > But if you had an English parser, it would yield several trees without any interpreting. Like this: "Fred saw a plane flying over Zurich" NAME VERB-PAST ARTICLE COUNTABLE-NOUN VERB-ING PREPOSITION NAME Some (much simplified) rules could be: Sentence ::= Noun-Phrase Verb Noun-Phrase Sentence ::= Noun-Phrase Verb Noun-Phrase Adverbial-Phrase Noun-Phrase ::= NAME | ARTICLE COUNTABLE-NOUN | Noun-Phrase VERB-ING Prepositional-Clause Verb ::= VERB-PAST Adverbial-Phrase ::= VERB-ING Preposition-Clause Preposition-Clause ::= PREPOSITION Noun-Phrase This simple grammar yields two parse trees for that sentence: Sentence ----Noun-Phrase --------NAME ------------Fred ----Verb --------VERB-PAST ------------saw ----Noun-Phrase --------Noun-Phrase ------------ARTICLE ----------------a ------------NOUN ----------------plane --------VERB-ING ------------flying --------Prepositional-Clause ------------PROPOSITION ----------------over ------------Noun-Phrase ----------------NAME --------------------Zurich Sentence ----Noun-Phrase --------NAME ------------Fred ----Verb --------VERB-PAST ------------saw ----Noun-Phrase --------Noun-Phrase ------------ARTICLE ----------------a ------------NOUN ----------------plane ----Adverbial-Phrase --------VERB-ING ------------flying --------Prepositional-Clause ------------PROPOSITION ----------------over ------------Noun-Phrase ----------------NAME --------------------Zurich Formal grammars for natural languages do exist, although they're not perfect, but the problem with multiple grammatically sensible parses (often millions of trees and more) is much greater than the problem with nonsensible trees or correct sentences that don't parse at all. Lojban was carefully designed to avoid this problem. And it doesn't have anything to do with {xi PA}. The Lojban grammar specifies XI clauses unambiguously. Parse trees are unique. Monoparsing is not a myth. XI clauses may add semantic ambiguity on a different level then, say, simple {zo'e}, but it doesn't have anything to do with syntactic ambiguity. {la fred pu viska lo vinji do'e lo se xi vei mo'e zo'e nei poi vofli ga'u la tsurix} has only one syntax tree, regardless of the number of possible semantic interpretations. In English you can have sentences that are semantically ambiguous due to syntactic ambiguity. In Lojban you can have sentences with (roughly) the same semantic ambiguity as the English ones, but syntactically unambiguous. > >> > {la fred pu viska lo vinji do'e lo se xi vei mo'e zo'e nei poi vofli >> ga'u >> > la tsurix} >> >> camxes only produces one parse tree for that. >> > > And for English you don't provide any parses at all. > May be someone should just parse the original English sentence as camxes > does for Lojban one? > I won't be surprised if such parser for English doesn't exist since those > who write them might mix parsing and interpretation of it. The latter would > be replacing {mo'e zo'e} with some PA which will immediately lead to > several syntactic trees. > > So I both disagree and agree with you on whether English sentence has > several syntactic trees. If using one term for two operations is stopped > the contradiction disappears. > > > >> If you think it should produce more then one, raise a bug report. >> > > I'm not aware of any Lojban parsers that perform interpretation operation. > In most cases you just need context and one interpretation. But this is > semantic analysis. Producing all possible syntactic trees is a task needed > more seldom. > Camxes is intended to produce all possible syntactic trees, and there's only one of them for any valid sentence. mu'o mi'e ianek -- 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. ------=_Part_639_231641866.1423359253100 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:13:30 AM UTC+1, l= a gleki wrote:


2015-02-04 15:45 GMT+03:00 v4hn <m= ...@v4hn.de>:
On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 = at 11:42:32AM +0300, Gleki Arxokuna wrote:
> "Fred saw a plane flying over Zurich" can have several meanings

Yes.
However, for me, the issue here is that we (hopefully..) agree
that there are different parse trees (which yield the different meanings).<= br>

No, several trees arise after you inter= pret the sentence.

But if you = had an English parser, it would yield several trees without any interpretin= g. Like this:

"Fred saw a plane flying over Zurich"
NAME VER= B-PAST ARTICLE COUNTABLE-NOUN VERB-ING PREPOSITION NAME

Some (much s= implified) rules could be:

Sentence ::=3D Noun-Phrase Verb Noun-Phra= se
Sentence ::=3D Noun-Phrase Verb Noun-Phrase Adverbial-Phrase
Noun-= Phrase ::=3D NAME | ARTICLE COUNTABLE-NOUN | Noun-Phrase VERB-ING Prepositi= onal-Clause
Verb ::=3D VERB-PAST
Adverbial-Phrase ::=3D VERB-ING Prep= osition-Clause
Preposition-Clause ::=3D PREPOSITION Noun-Phrase

T= his simple grammar yields two parse trees for that sentence:

Sentenc= e
----Noun-Phrase
--------NAME
------------Fred
----Verb
---= -----VERB-PAST
------------saw
----Noun-Phrase
--------Noun-Phrase=
------------ARTICLE
----------------a
------------NOUN
-------= ---------plane
--------VERB-ING
------------flying
--------Preposi= tional-Clause
------------PROPOSITION
----------------over
-------= -----Noun-Phrase
----------------NAME
--------------------Zurich
<= br>Sentence
----Noun-Phrase
--------NAME
------------Fred
----V= erb
--------VERB-PAST
------------saw
----Noun-Phrase
--------N= oun-Phrase
------------ARTICLE
----------------a
------------NOUN<= br>----------------plane
----Adverbial-Phrase
--------VERB-ING
---= ---------flying
--------Prepositional-Clause
------------PROPOSITION<= br>----------------over
------------Noun-Phrase
----------------NAME<= br>--------------------Zurich

Formal grammars for natural languages = do exist, although they're not perfect, but the problem with multiple gramm= atically sensible parses (often millions of trees and more) is much greater= than the problem with nonsensible trees or correct sentences that don't pa= rse at all.

Lojban was carefully designed to avoid this problem. And= it doesn't have anything to do with {xi PA}. The Lojban grammar specifies = XI clauses unambiguously. Parse trees are unique. Monoparsing is not a myth= . XI clauses may add semantic ambiguity on a different level then, say, sim= ple {zo'e}, but it doesn't have anything to do with syntactic ambiguity. {l= a fred pu viska lo vinji do'e lo se xi vei mo'e zo'e nei poi vofli ga'u la = tsurix} has only one syntax tree, regardless of the number of possible sema= ntic interpretations.

In English you can have sentences that are sem= antically ambiguous due to syntactic ambiguity. In Lojban you can have sent= ences with (roughly) the same semantic ambiguity as the English ones, but s= yntactically unambiguous.
 

> {la fred pu viska lo vinji do'e lo se xi vei mo'e zo'e nei poi vofli g= a'u
> la tsurix}

camxes only produces one parse tree for that.
<= br>
And for English you don't provide any parses at all.
May be someone should just parse the original English sentence as camxes = does for Lojban one?
I won't be surprised if such parser for Engl= ish doesn't exist since those who write them might mix parsing and interpre= tation of it. The latter would be replacing {mo'e zo'e} with some PA which = will immediately lead to several syntactic trees.

= So I both disagree and agree with you on whether English sentence has sever= al syntactic trees. If using one term for two operations is stopped the con= tradiction disappears.

 
If you think it should produce more then one, raise a bug report.

I'm not aware of any Lojban parsers that perform= interpretation operation. In most cases you just need context and one inte= rpretation. But this is semantic analysis. Producing all possible syntactic= trees is a task needed more seldom.

Camxes is intended to produce all possible syntactic trees, and ther= e's only one of them for any valid sentence.

mu'o mi'e ianek

--
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.
------=_Part_639_231641866.1423359253100-- ------=_Part_638_1420212553.1423359253100--