Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2017 15:08:11 -0800 (PST)
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <98db3894-350a-4361-84eb-d9033e0af862@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <335313038.174144.1510412237273@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <ef141db1-9811-4d44-8458-972ddffdd883@googlegroups.com> <38c97c6d-7f22-48da-a55e-c748fbdb830f@googlegroups.com> <c7a816b1-df34-4520-be73-6401e077ecf6@googlegroups.com>
 <335313038.174144.1510412237273@mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3035_1818723610.1510441691813"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.8
X-Spam_score_int: -17
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_3035_1818723610.1510441691813
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3036_14988146.1510441691813"

------=_Part_3036_14988146.1510441691813
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le samedi 11 novembre 2017 14:57:25 UTC, clifford a =C3=A9crit :
>
> Lojban=E2=80=99s claim to be based on logic is not significantly differen=
t from=20
> the similar claim for any language (sentences derived by transformations=
=20
> from underlying semantic representations which are often presented as=20
> formulae in some higher order intensional logic).  JCB ditched most of th=
e=20
> features of FOPL (the best then available) which gave for precision and=
=20
> most of the last 60 years has been spent trying to get at least some of=
=20
> that back (not yet all by a long shot).  Lojban is just an SAE language=
=20
> that looks a little strange because position in a sentence does not have =
a=20
> fixed meaning but rather depends upon the verb at the center.  End of=20
> borrowings from logic (hyperbole, but not much).
> The logic on which Lojban is =E2=80=9Cbased=E2=80=9D is again a European =
creation (mainly=20
> Anglo-American and German, with a little French and Italian).  It takes n=
o=20
> account of the logical traditions of India or China nor of the specialize=
d=20
> languages developed there for logic.  So, it is hardly culturally neutral=
=20
> in the sense suggested.  Of course, the need for cultural neutrality was=
=20
> prompted by the thoroughly bogus SWH, so its absence is not very damaging=
,=20
> except to the repeated claims to have it. =20
>
>

coi la pycyn

Thank you for the historical information about Loglan and Lojban. However,=
=20
I (and maybe la sykyndyr also) tried to "define" what to be called the=20
current and the future Lojban. That "definition" may be shifted from JCB's=
=20
or the later creaters' will.

As for my point of view of cultural neutrality, the facts of the ancient=20
India and the ancient China you pointed out cannot negate my theory.

 Some of what are studied in the ancient Indian and the ancient China are=
=20
now translated as "logic" into English because of the property of studies=
=20
related to reasoning. However, the subjects of those studies are reasoning,=
=20
not the symbols of Sanscrit or Hanzi. Those cultures did not invent what=20
can be translated as "symbolic logic", in which a new language consisting=
=20
of symbols simplified and specialized for expressing logic was invented.=20

As I have already discussed, that language invented for European logic are=
=20
not logic itself. That language, as well as Lojban, should be able to=20
express the ancient Indian logic or the ancient Chinese logic by defining=
=20
suitably logical axioms and rules of deduction, just like the modern=20
expression of fraction $frac{1}{3}$ can express both European "one over=20
three" and Chinese "san fen zhi yi"; the latter consists of "three",=20
"separation", postposition that means "of", "one".

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.

------=_Part_3036_14988146.1510441691813
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>Le samedi 11 novembre 2017 14:57:25 UTC, clifford =
a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;mar=
gin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div s=
tyle=3D"font-family:Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:13p=
x"><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). =C2=A0JCB =
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). =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 cente=
r. =C2=A0End 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)=
. =C2=A0It takes no account of the logical traditions of India or China nor=
 of the specialized languages developed there for logic. =C2=A0So, it is ha=
rdly culturally neutral in the sense suggested. =C2=A0Of 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. =C2=A0=
</div><div><div style=3D"font-family:&#39;Helvetica Neue&#39;,Helvetica,Ari=
al,sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#26282a"><div><div><div><div><br clear=
=3D"none"></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div=
><br></div><div><div><br></div><div>coi la pycyn</div><div><br></div><div>T=
hank you for the historical information about Loglan and Lojban. However, I=
 (and maybe la sykyndyr also) tried to &quot;define&quot; what to be called=
 the current and the future Lojban. That &quot;definition&quot; may be shif=
ted from JCB&#39;s or the later creaters&#39; will.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>As for my point of view of cultural neutrality, the facts of the ancient =
India and the ancient China you pointed out cannot negate my theory.</div><=
div><br></div><div>=C2=A0Some of what are studied in the ancient Indian and=
 the ancient China are now translated as &quot;logic&quot; into English bec=
ause of the property of studies related to reasoning. However, the subjects=
 of those studies are reasoning, not the symbols of Sanscrit or Hanzi. Thos=
e cultures did not invent what can be translated as &quot;symbolic logic&qu=
ot;, in which a new language consisting of symbols simplified and specializ=
ed for expressing logic was invented.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>As I h=
ave already discussed, that language invented for European logic are not lo=
gic itself. That language, as well as Lojban, should be able to express the=
 ancient Indian logic or the ancient Chinese logic by defining suitably log=
ical axioms and rules of deduction, just like the modern expression of frac=
tion $frac{1}{3}$ can express both European &quot;one over three&quot; and =
Chinese &quot;san fen zhi yi&quot;; the latter consists of &quot;three&quot=
;, &quot;separation&quot;, postposition that means &quot;of&quot;, &quot;on=
e&quot;.</div><div><br></div><div>mi&#39;e la guskant</div><div><br></div><=
div><br></div></div></div>

<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_3036_14988146.1510441691813--

------=_Part_3035_1818723610.1510441691813--