Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 74.6.131.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.6.131.42;
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 14:57:17 +0000 (UTC)
From: "'John E Clifford' via lojban" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
To: <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <335313038.174144.1510412237273@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <c7a816b1-df34-4520-be73-6401e077ecf6@googlegroups.com>
References: <ef141db1-9811-4d44-8458-972ddffdd883@googlegroups.com> <38c97c6d-7f22-48da-a55e-c748fbdb830f@googlegroups.com> <c7a816b1-df34-4520-be73-6401e077ecf6@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_174143_2121609289.1510412237269"
Content-Length: 13661
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: 0.3
X-Spam_score_int: 3
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
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  Lojban’s claim to be based on logic is not significantly
    different from the similar claim for any language (sentences derived by transformations
    from underlying semantic representations which are often presented as formulae
    in some higher order intensional logic).  JCB ditched most of the features
    of FOPL (the best then available) which gave for precision and most of the
    last 60 years has been spent trying to get at least some of that back (not
    yet all by a long shot).  Lojban is just an SAE language that looks a little
    strange because position in a sentence does not have a fixed meaning but
   rather depends upon the verb at the center.  End of borrowings from logic
    (hyperbole, but not much).The logic on which Lojban is “based” is again
    a European creation (mainly Anglo-American and German, with a little French
    and Italian).  It takes no account of the logical traditions of India or
    China nor of the specialized languages developed there for logic.  So, it
    is hardly culturally neutral in the sense suggested.  Of course, the need
    for cultural neutrality was prompted by the thoroughly bogus SWH, so its
   absence is not very damaging, except to the repeated claims to have it.  
    On Friday, November 10, 2017, 7:47:33 PM CST, guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
    wrote: [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (0.3 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]
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE     RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no
                             trust
                             [209.85.217.188 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3      RBL: Good reputation (+3)
                             [209.85.217.188 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  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_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU          Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
                             domain
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
  2.3 FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA     Forged mail pretending to be from Mozilla

------=_Part_174143_2121609289.1510412237269
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 Lojban=E2=80=99s claim to be based on logic is not significantly different=
 from the similar claim for any language (sentences derived by transformati=
ons from underlying semantic representations which are often presented as f=
ormulae in some higher order intensional logic). =C2=A0JCB ditched most of =
the features of FOPL (the best then available) which gave for precision and=
 most of the last 60 years has been spent trying to get at least some of th=
at back (not yet all by a long shot). =C2=A0Lojban is just an SAE language =
that looks a little strange because position in a sentence does not have a =
fixed meaning but rather depends upon the verb at the center. =C2=A0End of =
borrowings from logic (hyperbole, but not much).The logic on which Lojban i=
s =E2=80=9Cbased=E2=80=9D is again a European creation (mainly Anglo-Americ=
an and German, with a little French and Italian). =C2=A0It takes no account=
 of the logical traditions of India or China nor of the specialized languag=
es developed there for logic. =C2=A0So, it is hardly culturally neutral in =
the sense suggested. =C2=A0Of course, the need for cultural neutrality was =
prompted by the thoroughly bogus SWH, so its absence is not very damaging, =
except to the repeated claims to have it. =C2=A0
    On Friday, November 10, 2017, 7:47:33 PM CST, guskant <gusni.kantu@gmai=
l.com> wrote: =20
=20
 coi la sykyndyr
I agree to the most part of your summary, though I have two points to sugge=
st the precision.

Le jeudi 9 novembre 2017 20:48:20 UTC, Benoit Neil a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:

* Lojban basics *What defines Lojban? (Or "What should never change in Lojb=
an?"). So, if I try to sum up again from various sources, the answers are b=
elow (please tell if you disagree):
YES!  =20
   - Non-ambiguous grammar (~=3D monoparsing, machine parsable)  =20

   - Unicity (~=3D forks are experiments or proposals)  =20

   - Cultural neutrality  =20

   - Partially based on logic  =20

   - Rather stable ("rather" has to be refined)  =20

   - Usable (speakable, learnable, writable, readable...)  =20

   - Usage defines the language, as long as these "basics" are untouched.
  =20
   - However the "usage" is rather a blurry situation for now...=C2=A0


=C2=A01. "Partially based on logic".The phrase "based on logic" is not suit=
able qualification for a word that signifies a language.
A language is a set of symbols, while logic is a theory of reasoning accord=
ing to which the meaning of a string of symbols is derived from the meaning=
 of another string of symbols. In any kind of logic, the theory is defined =
so that a false cannot be derived from a truth.
Symbols are not meanings. A set of symbols cannot be based on a theory of m=
eanings signified by symbols.
As a precise description of Lojban, the following sentence is suitable:
A part of the grammar of Lojban is based on the grammar of a language used =
in the predicate logic.
# By the way, the CLL defines also semantics of Lojban, among which there a=
re something related to logic. However, the semantics written in the CLL co=
ntains very important logical defects, of which I raised the ideas of corre=
ctions in the BPFK meeting but failed to make them official.=C2=A0

2. "Cultural neutrality"The CLL defends it by creation of gismu based on th=
e six languages of the majority on the Earth. However, as Gleki pointed out=
, the selection of gismu set is based on European culture. It lacks some im=
portant words for people in other cultures, for example {bambu} (listed on =
the jbovlaste as an experimental gismu) is not in the official gismu list, =
though it is a very important word for south east asian people.
However, from my point of view, the cultural neutrality of a language does =
not depend on the content words like gismu, but on the grammar.
Important content words should vary according to the speaker's lifestyle, t=
he culture of each speaker. A cultural neutrality on gismu set is impossibl=
e. On the other hand, the grammar of Lojban is based on the grammar of lang=
uage used in the predicate logic, which is very simplified and specialized =
in order to treat statements easily in logical reasoning. Such a grammar is=
 indeed the cultural neutrality.
That's it, and the ideas above are based on my creation of a series of shor=
t films to be released soon. You all are lucky to know the ideas before rel=
ease.
mu'o mi'e la guskant


--=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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 =20

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

------=_Part_174143_2121609289.1510412237269
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head></head><body><div style=3D"font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetic=
a, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><div></div>
            <div>Lojban=E2=80=99s claim to be based on logic is not signifi=
cantly different from the similar claim for any language (sentences derived=
 by transformations from underlying semantic representations which are ofte=
n presented as formulae in some higher order intensional logic). &nbsp;JCB =
ditched most of the features of FOPL (the best then available) which gave f=
or precision and most of the last 60 years has been spent trying to get at =
least some of that back (not yet all by a long shot). &nbsp;Lojban is just =
an SAE language that looks a little strange because position in a sentence =
does not have a fixed meaning but rather depends upon the verb at the cente=
r. &nbsp;End of borrowings from logic (hyperbole, but not much).</div><div>=
The logic on which Lojban is =E2=80=9Cbased=E2=80=9D is again a European cr=
eation (mainly Anglo-American and German, with a little French and Italian)=
. &nbsp;It takes no account of the logical traditions of India or China nor=
 of the specialized languages developed there for logic. &nbsp;So, it is ha=
rdly culturally neutral in the sense suggested. &nbsp;Of course, the need f=
or cultural neutrality was prompted by the thoroughly bogus SWH, so its abs=
ence is not very damaging, except to the repeated claims to have it. &nbsp;=
</div><div><br></div>
           =20
            <div id=3D"yahoo_quoted_1281990630" class=3D"yahoo_quoted">
                <div style=3D"font-family:'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Aria=
l, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a;">
                   =20
                    <div>
                        On Friday, November 10, 2017, 7:47:33 PM CST, guska=
nt &lt;gusni.kantu@gmail.com&gt; wrote:
                    </div>
                    <div><br></div>
                    <div><br></div>
                    <div><div id=3D"yiv8360017292"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><d=
iv>coi la sykyndyr</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>I agree to the m=
ost part of your summary, though I have two points to suggest the precision=
.</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><br clear=3D"none">Le jeudi 9 novembre=
 2017 20:48:20 UTC, Benoit Neil a =C3=A9crit&nbsp;:<blockquote class=3D"yiv=
8360017292gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px =
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><br clear=3D"none"></di=
v><div><b><font size=3D"4">* Lojban basics *</font></b></div><div>What defi=
nes Lojban? (Or "What should never change in Lojban?"). So, if I try to sum=
 up again from various sources, the answers are below (please tell if you d=
isagree):</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div><b><u>YES!</u></b></div><=
div><ul><li>Non-ambiguous grammar (~=3D monoparsing, machine parsable)<br c=
lear=3D"none"></li><li>Unicity (~=3D forks are experiments or proposals)<br=
 clear=3D"none"></li><li>Cultural neutrality<br clear=3D"none"></li><li>Par=
tially based on logic<br clear=3D"none"></li><li>Rather stable ("rather" ha=
s to be refined)<br clear=3D"none"></li><li>Usable (speakable, learnable, w=
ritable, readable...)<br clear=3D"none"></li><li>Usage defines the language=
, as long as these "basics" are untouched.</li><ul><li>However the "usage" =
is rather a blurry situation for now...&nbsp;</li></ul></ul></div><div></di=
v></div></blockquote><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>&nbsp;1. "Partially=
 based on logic".</div><div>The phrase "based on logic" is not suitable qua=
lification for a word that signifies a language.</div><div><br clear=3D"non=
e"></div><div>A language is a set of symbols, while logic is a theory of re=
asoning according to which the meaning of a string of symbols is derived fr=
om the meaning of another string of symbols. In any kind of logic, the theo=
ry is defined so that a false cannot be derived from a truth.</div><div><br=
 clear=3D"none"></div><div>Symbols are not meanings. A set of symbols canno=
t be based on a theory of meanings signified by symbols.</div><div><br clea=
r=3D"none"></div><div>As a precise description of Lojban, the following sen=
tence is suitable:</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>A part of the gr=
ammar of Lojban is based on the grammar of a language used in the predicate=
 logic.</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div># By the way, the CLL defin=
es also semantics of Lojban, among which there are something related to log=
ic. However, the semantics written in the CLL contains very important logic=
al defects, of which I raised the ideas of corrections in the BPFK meeting =
but failed to make them official.&nbsp;</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div>=
<div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>2. "Cultural neutrality"</div><div>The C=
LL defends it by creation of gismu based on the six languages of the majori=
ty on the Earth. However, as Gleki pointed out, the selection of gismu set =
is based on European culture. It lacks some important words for people in o=
ther cultures, for example {bambu} (listed on the jbovlaste as an experimen=
tal gismu) is not in the official gismu list, though it is a very important=
 word for south east asian people.</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>=
However, from my point of view, the cultural neutrality of a language does =
not depend on the content words like gismu, but on the grammar.</div><div><=
br clear=3D"none"></div><div>Important content words should vary according =
to the speaker's lifestyle, the culture of each speaker. A cultural neutral=
ity on gismu set is impossible. On the other hand, the grammar of Lojban is=
 based on the grammar of language used in the predicate logic, which is ver=
y simplified and specialized in order to treat statements easily in logical=
 reasoning. Such a grammar is indeed the cultural neutrality.</div><div><br=
 clear=3D"none"></div><div>That's it, and the ideas above are based on my c=
reation of a series of short films to be released soon. You all are lucky t=
o know the ideas before release.</div><div><br clear=3D"none"></div><div>mu=
'o mi'e la guskant</div><div class=3D"yiv8360017292yqt0508188406" id=3D"yiv=
8360017292yqtfd23434"><div><br clear=3D"none"></div></div></div><div class=
=3D"yiv8360017292yqt0508188406" id=3D"yiv8360017292yqtfd95475">

<p></p>

-- <br clear=3D"none">
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br clear=3D"none">
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a rel=3D"nofollow" shape=3D"rect" ymailto=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubsc=
ribe@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@=
googlegroups.com">lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br clear=3D"none=
">
To post to this group, send email to <a rel=3D"nofollow" shape=3D"rect" yma=
ilto=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com" target=3D"_blank" href=3D"mailto:lo=
jban@googlegroups.com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br clear=3D"none">
Visit this group at <a rel=3D"nofollow" shape=3D"rect" target=3D"_blank" hr=
ef=3D"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban">https://groups.google.com/gro=
up/lojban</a>.<br clear=3D"none">
For more options, visit <a rel=3D"nofollow" shape=3D"rect" target=3D"_blank=
" href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">https://groups.google.com/d/o=
ptout</a>.<br clear=3D"none"></div></div></div></div>
                </div>
            </div></div></body></html>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http=
s://groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_174143_2121609289.1510412237269--