Received: from mail-ua0-f189.google.com ([209.85.217.189]:52416) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eEuXf-0000i1-Ca for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:37 -0800 Received: by mail-ua0-f189.google.com with SMTP id n23sf4077600uab.11 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=zl0/dDMdwJJnekMtWSayJ4UT8YNU/25SytAxtuGyto0=; b=QJ7Rhtw/aYAO6oIVaRKxJWCb5SyxvSI6qReDXxD5PSkMyEEabnStqyj5iIlpDk2tZ8 w53hTSQM7kEbRYwpFe3Mfl8BQ4ZSH7atPwrN3W/uc+2cMe5dvMAaM9SNbWT4m/9np1i9 pkXrhbQd+Uk+ugUSA5Vg6VIo7o0+yH11q0P9Rmn5YmVjK/94zJyiFjq0dhQhJglZYpZK KIj/tET7RmlMEzrFgMBwhLuq3KQ3SnuSOOmO9FdFYN5o8oeHWQKMWALY9TwWRs1KQhfJ tUMLGu01Y2WaITtROEmEwbuY+VpzbvlRSb8fJkfoSBGZUM16pkoI4gvYSC9CpqFBu4ih vzgA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=zl0/dDMdwJJnekMtWSayJ4UT8YNU/25SytAxtuGyto0=; b=s/bj+7JubQ2wVX+LcN9y9g8sWd9yr/Kv5i6P8gpaFqhIbdSodtZen5iZjrvH+GC4DL xYZtipbjT/6AKdZxrJh/Wu+5gk7MTir3YpGmnB7RNsy926wkiKlrBFp25DFgeaj72tOv yjbXXcYCBFtEsGeL6ZWzyT7YD+W41tZ4FhL0Mn9pLMTcnMKbieho9VLXnVVc77l5UWh6 Y1hEwU215Tl7rRw9yBBNozSxuGEtkCvxT4h8S67CdVTAJFOlIlhZDt2Q2OfQ7Tw9Qhsc oD5OxFkmqsOVRWs0VtPEbEMXPhQ7N41w5ZLaW48qKIbott62/8LkN3KbtKYXB474ck/W 9EGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=zl0/dDMdwJJnekMtWSayJ4UT8YNU/25SytAxtuGyto0=; b=icelo+/+vRrLdNmfmGc0OQBq+Jdzi1PjgfwkFXH69qGolXn+kkWIQxJlXScdLrqnMq o1z32LHIMHRbQOC/v96WqOZg3Va7aKD9+vxR+FybG5XyQ1EWiwMBX1EUj10862yC0QRe HFigFS+L3j9qunsPnGuiR2wh2m890GapCTfy/u473eqVk/qUEStV08s5K3kbRZ5Zaa/S otqmEnMUlq2UdmJLHpfSh7SVnKhSNcA7qBrQJXRsNrFqwikiPDXmKHI88z+nkayy4M6V 5bRRzWUqMCuU09WplMKsQX4NZk1bLvJCoR/AhCyuc7Sl/v2gTxAba1xCTquq4AOGSsDB lQ8A== Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX4FXDZtpnlnSAyqdtZPBiVNWQvNP7qGa3NE6yvOwO1QGbuOMvCj Msnm1LTgZPJxfo5+DNLnTxY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaWjykcslN21vqgZp1D0Rp3WudioQrK8azQITLZEh9swIOmVCFrxn1saZDw7JZzerL56+bvrw== X-Received: by 10.31.189.69 with SMTP id n66mr205098vkf.6.1510740209083; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:29 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.176.72.205 with SMTP id y13ls6028583uac.17.gmail; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:28 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.31.161.87 with SMTP id k84mr2046622vke.7.1510740208413; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 02:03:28 -0800 (PST) From: sukender1@gmail.com To: lojban Message-Id: <9315ecc9-5434-4378-9ed5-a79aa1381529@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <963393d6-a9f1-4232-be13-b4ee76eb69e1@googlegroups.com> References: <78156dc5-1fb3-4e9d-992c-a8f30facc4fd@googlegroups.com> <963393d6-a9f1-4232-be13-b4ee76eb69e1@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: CLL and modern Lojban MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_10284_2007279302.1510740208274" X-Original-Sender: sukender1@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: - ------=_Part_10284_2007279302.1510740208274 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10285_2041856354.1510740208275" ------=_Part_10285_2041856354.1510740208275 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please read "... who want to NOT throw away..." Le mercredi 15 novembre 2017 10:38:00 UTC+1, Benoit Neil a =C3=A9crit : > > And, you told that there are 3 groups. If I rephrase: > > 1. CLL 1.1 "purists", who want to "throw away" what has been learned > 2. The ones who want to "bug fix" CLL regarding to logic. > 3. The ones who want to "upgrade" CLL. > > It is not clear to me if 2nd and 3rd ideas would break up *many* things= =20 > (thus forcing to "re-learn" when having learned CLL 1.1), or only details= .=20 > Somebody has clues on this? > (And yes, each potential change would have to be evaluated on that=20 > question.) > > Aside from that, I feel that the 2nd and 3rd group should agree to perfor= m=20 > first common steps altogether. Isn't it the case? If not, why? > > la .sykyndyr. > > > > Le lundi 13 novembre 2017 16:44:47 UTC+1, And Rosta a =C3=A9crit : >> >> >> >> On 8 Nov 2017 12:54, "Timothy Lawrence" = =20 >> wrote: >> >> *> We have long known that CLL Lojban is not logically unambiguous, is= =20 >> not internally consistent,* >> >> What do you mean?=20 >> >> >> CLL does not give complete and consistent rules for unambiguously mappin= g=20 >> Lojban sentences to logical forms. For folk for whom Lojban's purportedl= y=20 >> being a logical language is its paramount property, that is a big deal.= =20 >> >> >> Is there something that documents this? >> >> >> I don't know. It's certainly there in the mail archives and antique wiki= =20 >> pages. Selpahi read through 25 years of email and wiki discussion in ord= er=20 >> to understand the issues.=20 >> >> My sense is that the folk who care about logic are more interested simpl= y=20 >> in mending the language rather than in creating documents that focus on= =20 >> explaining in one place all the problems with CLL Lojban, but there may= =20 >> well be newer expository stuff I don't know about. >> >> A complicating factor is that not only is the community divided into=20 >> those who care about logic and those who don't (and can therefore favour= =20 >> CLL Lojban), those who care about logic are in turn divided into those w= ho=20 >> want to make the minimum changes to CLL Lojban to sort out the logical= =20 >> issues and those who think that if you're going to make any changes at a= ll=20 >> then you might as well fix some of the most egregious design flaws in or= der=20 >> to make the language much more user-friendly. Essentially the two positi= ons=20 >> weigh the effort invested by the few people who have learnt CLL thorough= ly=20 >> against the much larger but more hypothetical number who might learn and= =20 >> use Lojban in future. >> >> >> >> *> is not complete,* >> >> I agree and would like to help complete it. >> >> >> This is the job of the BPFK, but not much progres is visible from that= =20 >> group. >> >> In my view, xorxes and selpahi should simply define bodies of candidate= =20 >> new rules and changes and the rest of the BPFK or community or LLG shoul= d=20 >> vote on them by some suitably intelligent voting method. You could make = it=20 >> more democratic by allowing anyone to submit proposed changes, but I wou= ld=20 >> be inclined to vote for exactly whatever xorxes and selpahi propose. Tho= se=20 >> innovations elected would be deemed to supersede CLL where there is=20 >> incompatibility. And then textbook writers can write it up. Admittedly,= =20 >> that already happened for xorlo, but nobody has yet textbooked it. >> >> --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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. ------=_Part_10285_2041856354.1510740208275 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Please read "... who want to NOT throw away..."<= br>
Le mercredi 15 novembre 2017 10:38:00 UTC+1, Benoit Neil a =C3=A9cri= t=C2=A0:
= And, you told that there are 3 groups. If I rephrase:
  1. CLL= 1.1 "purists", who want to "throw away" what has been = learned
  2. The ones who want to "bug fix" CLL regarding = to logic.
  3. The ones who want to "upgrade" CLL.
It is not clear to me if 2nd and 3rd ideas would break up <= b>many things (thus forcing to "re-learn" when having lea= rned CLL 1.1), or only details. Somebody has clues on this?
(And = yes, each potential change would have to be evaluated on that question.)

Aside from that, I feel that the 2nd and 3rd group s= hould agree to perform first common steps altogether. Isn't it the case= ? If not, why?

la .sykyndyr.

<= br>
Le lundi 13 novembre 2017 16:44:47 UTC+1, And Rosta a =C3=A9crit=C2= =A0:


On 8 Nov 2017 12:54, "Timothy Lawrence= " <timothy....@connect.qut.edu.au> = wrote:

> We have long known that= CLL Lojban is not logically unambiguous, is not internally consistent,

What do you mean?

CLL does not give complete= and consistent rules for unambiguously mapping Lojban sentences to logical= forms. For folk for whom Lojban's purportedly being a logical language= is its paramount property, that is a big deal.=C2=A0


Is there something that documents this?

I don&#= 39;t know. It's certainly there in the mail archives and antique wiki p= ages. Selpahi read through 25 years of email and wiki discussion in order t= o understand the issues.=C2=A0

My sense is that the folk who care about logic are more interested s= imply in mending the language rather than in creating documents that focus = on explaining in one place all the problems with CLL Lojban, but there may = well be newer expository stuff I don't know about.

A complicating factor is that not only is th= e community divided into those who care about logic and those who don't= (and can therefore favour CLL Lojban), those who care about logic are in t= urn divided into those who want to make the minimum changes to CLL Lojban t= o sort out the logical issues and those who think that if you're going = to make any changes at all then you might as well fix some of the most egre= gious design flaws in order to make the language much more user-friendly. E= ssentially the two positions weigh the effort invested by the few people wh= o have learnt CLL thoroughly against the much larger but more hypothetical = number who might learn and use Lojban in future.


> is not complete,=

I agree and would like to help complete it.

This is= the job of the BPFK, but not much progres is visible from that group.

In my view, xorxes and selpa= hi should simply define bodies of candidate new rules and changes and the r= est of the BPFK or community or LLG should vote on them by some suitably in= telligent voting method. You could make it more democratic by allowing anyo= ne to submit proposed changes, but I would be inclined to vote for exactly = whatever xorxes and selpahi propose. Those innovations elected would be dee= med to supersede CLL where there is incompatibility. And then textbook writ= ers can write it up. Admittedly, that already happened for xorlo, but nobod= y has yet textbooked it.

--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= s://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_10285_2041856354.1510740208275-- ------=_Part_10284_2007279302.1510740208274--