Received: from mail-qt0-f188.google.com ([209.85.216.188]:33407) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1borLA-000211-Ls for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:34 -0700 Received: by mail-qt0-f188.google.com with SMTP id 38sf5186275qte.0 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=3/gTAdb5C80JEJrXN8C2+hLoAe3Y3kPzGSyMr1G05wc=; b=DJL/N1/3DDFkwN4+2v/+OCgI1YKq0GoR7JgqIa/MJTmuO7x0ylwt6WpCttKvgsYq8A nU6HERrIxMZCamTympGPQeKdB2s9GiW0YQ3S4l2Vm+LeggEYGURI7mmE47REAH7G2t5w YIUdnGCUKXhUeu7oabzDAvhpRYrQSK9Fs9H0xs6RvrEZtcrq8mFUUF/f3ZmMBtRfissj XZjUjj5ILSATFhatQGh0A89Za9+zwxxei5Ufj0o6pc1qzPaEIy+DKE2gj21YFv8DzuQD L8YVLoWwqVs0AUKUB7iBuid1x4ffChWbbI5COw7g8Ycwzfba6cB4v2l7a2eP+jnX9ye1 sd0g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=3/gTAdb5C80JEJrXN8C2+hLoAe3Y3kPzGSyMr1G05wc=; b=b0nNRnmDOcdASrsEGkW1nhS7gPlcuRFP4j7QKDADA0IQKNVNjTXLUlUe4SJo8OKW75 JE/xWJCt2dLBVPw2gDHxkTwvrYHrt/LykHye3oFbKx0q3LlKWQ9LXvitmw59IsPNA5tR o3ooFrM/NMqCzTuUZW1BI8thLiWzsq/WUzjPiYeABR2zuTlZXxSqmlEx5sQsfsFJmWuJ UgmJTqupxXMOQt/MtYuWOcOfZs5fctWc6mWc9yF60mditt3BNYSnnc5gvcBDwBXczZQd vaeEax/Kx4QPWRZ/5C2rdeQCQx3FMSWR151uGiYQBuiyntco5nTExn8JbWpyCdgpkwOQ syNA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=3/gTAdb5C80JEJrXN8C2+hLoAe3Y3kPzGSyMr1G05wc=; b=NfTVzShRP5HUdrsnurVyDQpN2wxU9HqCWRP+obJRLIwcF6zbYUbu8kbVb6ZqXBeLoP LbrvvJHjYQHCdK1cdA+v2guzbO3FJzhq3LATIolYYQFmnbr4uo1c6sS+QIYgXJPep/MJ TqNSwouTsMl0DW/Yf4HNQ8ti2cPwK8ihLnhtL6rsaUdfUuiSAxqr8U4PXU9yVeQuGoF4 VQKptEHzubnSudZ4MbQUDasrsqwucA2SmjggBWlGLQ6yPCJaujt1NqCoMnVX+QIPBzx5 w7+tNAkOcF5Iv+Ec6RR+XHj6KbeFBrJfmk95d1yVQaEj/fJCafoXWWeXmcwy6n81EPkn HgOA== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rn1qY5SpOMgyge/++t0DFqDUuMw0H62jm9XosSL/fFV5jr12wqK3rKSMPtox3zsDg== X-Received: by 10.36.228.131 with SMTP id o125mr101608ith.6.1474978702704; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:22 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.107.11.86 with SMTP id v83ls6973725ioi.3.gmail; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.50.149 with SMTP id j143mr834266ita.15.1474978700994; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb0-x236.google.com (mail-yb0-x236.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u139si125743ywe.5.2016.09.27.05.18.20 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of susannah.j.d@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236; Received: by mail-yb0-x236.google.com with SMTP id e2so2604216ybi.1 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.37.174.140 with SMTP id b12mr21253522ybj.147.1474978700506; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.170.39 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Sep 2016 05:18:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <309770757.1620403.1474910440149@mail.yahoo.com> From: Susannah Doss Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 08:18:19 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] A Simpler Connective System (blog article) To: lojban@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045dbc1e7ebc39053d7c3d4a X-Original-Sender: susannah.j.d@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of susannah.j.d@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4002:c09::236 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=susannah.j.d@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-Spam-Checked-In-Group: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_bar: - --f403045dbc1e7ebc39053d7c3d4a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 As a *nintadni *whose opinion arguably doesn't matter that much*, I've avoided using connectives because I was horribly confused by what I've read about the existing system. *.i .ie ji'a lo frica nintadni cu tugni lo du'u mi'a cinmo lo xrani .uanmonai *There were so many words to remember for different situations! When I read the new proposal, I immediately understood the proposed system. It seems much more elegant than the existing system. I really like it. *.i lo mibypre cu pa'itce lo melbi selti'i* ** to .i a'o lo mrilu mibziljmina cu nalkansa lo donynabmi toi* *.i ki'e la zabna donpre* *.i mi'e la .suzanys.* On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 7:34 AM, wrote: > > > Em segunda-feira, 26 de setembro de 2016 21:31:11 UTC+3, aionys escreveu: >> >> Aha, I found .xorxes.'s proposal. Apparently it overloads {gi}, while >> this one does not? >> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/ExtEumbYoQg >> > > You can also find a boiled down version of it. > > >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:20 AM, 'John E Clifford' via lojban < >> loj...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >>> Since JCB through out the basic structure of FOPL on day one of the >>> development of Loglan and decided to graft a pseudo form onto a SAE base, >>> things like trying to simplify the conjunction system have been a matter of >>> ever increasing complexity, interrupted occasionally by attempts to get >>> back to the basic underlying simplicity -- with scarcely visible success. >>> To be sure, Lojban has achieved the monoparsing with which it should have >>> begun at the cost of Byzantine complexity (and questionable accuracy) But >>> it seems unlikely that much reform can keep this result and cut through the >>> mare's nest. There are those that love the complexity and the documented >>> structure (the best documentation in the language business, after all) and >>> -- despite occasional complaints about not getting more new people -- glory >>> in their isolated mastery, and so they are not interested in >>> "improvements". Mere improvers are also too tied up in the status quo to >>> consider scrapping the mess and starting over on the right foot this time. >>> So, changes, fueled merely be convenience or clarity, are not likely to >>> occur. Changes that add to complexity are always welcome, of course. >>> >>> >>> On Monday, September 26, 2016 11:41 AM, And Rosta >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 26 September 2016 at 16:04, selpahi wrote: >>> >>> On 26.09.2016 16:43, And Rosta wrote: >>> >>> Having given the matter about .0001% of the thought you have, I wonder >>> whether the gi'i terminator is optimal. Firstly it would not always be >>> easy to work out on the fly when it is and isn't elidable, so the >>> prudent strategy would be to leave it in except when certain it is >>> elidable. Secondly, when it isn't elided it adds an extra word and two >>> extra syllables. A better alternative would be to introduce medial >>> conjuncts with _go_ rather than _gi_, and use _gi_ only for introducing >>> final conjuncts: {ga JA A go B go C gi D}. (Or, one step neater, use >>> _gu_ for medial conjuncts and _go_ for the tanru coordination >>> introducer. Or _ge_.) >>> >>> >>> The only times {gi'i} would not be elidible is if another connective >>> follows that is supposed to apply to the entire forethought connection to >>> its left. In all other cases {gi'i} is elidible, because each {gi} can only >>> devour exactly one sumti, after which the entire connection ends >>> automatically. >>> >>> Your strategy with {go} would involve much more forethought than this, >>> because you would have to be absolutely certain that you only want to add >>> exactly one more item. >>> >>> >>> Yes, but in designing an ergonomic loglang -- which okay, Lojban isn't >>> and doesn't aspire to be, but we're kind of imagining if it were trying to >>> be -- should minimizing speaker forethought be prioritized over, say, >>> minimizing hearer backtracking, or minimizing verbosity? (I think no.) >>> >>> >>> >>> Do you have any situations in mind where working out whether {gi'i} is >>> elidible would not be easy? >>> >>> >>> I was thinking of {ga JA1 ga JA2 ga JA3 A gi B gi C gi D gi E gi F gi G >>> gi H gi I gi J gi K}, which I presume would treat A--K as conjuncts of JA3, >>> and would require two {gi'i}s (terminating JA3 and JA2) to mark the >>> intended structure (whatever it is). Have I misunderstood? I suppose it's >>> not hard to work out that gi'i is unelidable, so I will withdraw the first >>> of my two objections. A reason for preferring the terminator over >>> alternatives is that terminators are the Lojban way; but a reason for >>> preferring terminatorless alternatives is that they can potentially involve >>> incremental parsing without lookahead, which I think is >>> psycholinguistically much less taxing, and that terminators are >>> psycholinguistically alien. >>> >>> --And. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you for your comment. >>> >>> ~~~mi'e la solpa'i >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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+un...@googlegroup s.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout >>> . >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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+un...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://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+un...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> mu'o mi'e .aionys. >> >> .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o >> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) >> > -- > 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 https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --f403045dbc1e7ebc39053d7c3d4a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As a=C2=A0nintadni=C2=A0whose opinion arguably does= n't matter that much*, I've avoided using connectives because I was= horribly confused by what I've read about the existing system.=C2=A0.i .ie ji'a lo frica nintadni cu tugni lo du'u mi'a cinmo lo x= rani .uanmonai=C2=A0There were so many words to remember for different = situations! When I read the new proposal, I immediately understood the prop= osed system. It seems much more elegant than the existing system. I really = like it.=C2=A0.i lo mibypre cu pa'itce lo melbi selti'i
=
* to .i a'o lo mrilu mibziljmina cu nalkansa lo donyn= abmi toi

.i ki'e la zabna donpre=
.i mi'e la .suzanys.

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 7:34 AM, = <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:


Em segunda-fe= ira, 26 de setembro de 2016 21:31:11 UTC+3, aionys escreveu:
Aha, I found .xorxes.'s prop= osal. Apparently it overloads {gi}, while this one does not?

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban= /ExtEumbYoQg

You can also = find a boiled down version of it.
=C2=A0


On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:20 AM, 'John E C= lifford' via lojban <loj...@go= oglegroups.com> wrote:
Since JCB through out the basic structure of FOPL on da= y one of the development of Loglan and decided to graft a pseudo form onto = a SAE base, things like trying to simplify the conjunction system have been= a matter of ever increasing complexity, interrupted occasionally by attemp= ts to get back to the basic underlying simplicity -- with scarcely visible = success.=C2=A0 To be sure, Lojban has achieved the monoparsing with which i= t should have begun at the cost of Byzantine complexity (and questionable a= ccuracy) But it seems unlikely that much reform can keep this result and cu= t through the mare's nest.=C2=A0 There are those that love the complexi= ty and the documented structure (the best documentation in the language bus= iness, after all) and -- despite occasional complaints about not getting mo= re new people -- glory in their isolated mastery, and=C2=A0 so they are not= interested in "improvements".=C2=A0 Mere improvers are also too = tied up in the status quo to consider scrapping the mess and starting over = on the right foot this time.=C2=A0 So, changes, fueled merely be convenienc= e or clarity, are not likely to occur.=C2=A0 Changes that add to complexity= are always welcome, of course. =C2=A0


On Monday, September 26, 2016 11:41 AM, = And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:



=
On 26 September 2016 at 16:04, sel= pahi <sel...@gmx.de= > wrote:
On 26.09.2016 16:43= , And Rosta wrote:
Having given the matter about .0001% of the thought you have, I wonder
whether the gi'i terminator is optimal. Firstly it would not always be<= br clear=3D"none"> easy to work out on the fly when it is and isn't elidable, so the
prudent strategy would be to leave it in except when certain it is
elidable. Secondly, when it isn't elided it adds an extra word and two<= br clear=3D"none"> extra syllables. A better alternative would be to introduce medial
conjuncts with _go_ rather than _gi_, and use _gi_ only for introducing
final conjuncts: {ga JA A go B go C gi D}. (Or, one step neater, use
_gu_ for medial conjuncts and _go_ for the tanru coordination
introducer. Or _ge_.)

The only times {gi'i} would not be elidible is if another connective fo= llows that is supposed to apply to the entire forethought connection to its= left. In all other cases {gi'i} is elidible, because each {gi} can onl= y devour exactly one sumti, after which the entire connection ends automati= cally.

Your strategy with {go} would involve much more forethought than this, beca= use you would have to be absolutely certain that you only want to add exact= ly one more item.

Yes, but in designing an ergonomic loglang -- which okay, Lojban i= sn't and doesn't aspire to be, but we're kind of imagining if i= t were trying to be -- should minimizing speaker forethought be prioritized= over, say, minimizing hearer backtracking, or minimizing verbosity? (I thi= nk no.)
=C2=A0

Do you have any situations in mind where working out whether {gi'i} is = elidible would not be easy?

I was thinking of {ga JA1 ga JA2 ga JA3 A gi B gi C gi= D gi E gi F gi G gi H gi I gi J gi K}, which I presume would treat A--K as= conjuncts of JA3, and would require two {gi'i}s (terminating JA3 and J= A2) to mark the intended structure (whatever it is). Have I misunderstood? = I suppose it's not hard to work out that gi'i is unelidable, so I w= ill withdraw the first of my two objections. A reason for preferring the te= rminator over alternatives is that terminators are the Lojban way; but a re= ason for preferring terminatorless alternatives is that they can potentiall= y involve incremental parsing without lookahead, which I think is psycholin= guistically much less taxing, and that terminators are psycholinguistically= alien.

--And.


=C2=A0

Thank you for your comment.

~~~mi'e la solpa'i


--
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+un...@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj= ...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/gro= u p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/o= p tout.


<= /div>
--
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+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj= ...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/gro= up/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/o= ptout.


=

--
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+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroup= s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban= .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout= .



--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima = lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot S= ide! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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 https://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= s://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--f403045dbc1e7ebc39053d7c3d4a--