Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 01:48:20 -0800 (PST)
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
Message-Id: <af9a3c0c-0e98-445b-820a-4be67e9334f5@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <86muayxzyr.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
References: <86muayxzyr.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Question about BO w/mixed logical and non-logical connectives
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_5953_563696925.1578476900343"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -2.9
X-Spam_score_int: -28
X-Spam_bar: --

------=_Part_5953_563696925.1578476900343
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_5954_676144739.1578476900343"

------=_Part_5954_676144739.1578476900343
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le mercredi 8 janvier 2020 05:46:43 UTC, scope845h...@icebubble.org a=20
=C3=A9crit :
>
> coi rodo,=20
>

coi do
=20

>
> I have a couple of (3) questions about {BO} and how it behaves when it=20
> is used in a sumti containing both logical (A) and non-logical (JOI)=20
> connectives and/or tensed logical connections (A+PU+BO, JOI+PU+BO).=20
>
> (I thought about posting this to the Lojban Beginners' list, but it=20
> didn't seem like a beginners' question.  Feel free to re-/cross-post if=
=20
> you think that appropriate.)=20
>
>   {le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu .e le xekri .e le blabi} means=20
>
>   "(((the red and the green) and the blue) and the black) and the white",=
=20
>   but {BO} increases connective precedence and reverses associativity, so=
=20
>
>   {le xunre .e le crino .ebo le blanu .ebo le xekri .e le blabi} means=20
>
>   "(the red and (the green and (the blue and the black))) and the white".=
=20
>
>   This works with non-logical connectives, too, i.e.:=20
>
>   {le xunre joi le crino joibo le blanu joibo le xekri joi le blabi} mean=
s=20
>
>   "(the red with (the green with (the blue with the black))) with the=20
> white".=20
>
> That's how {BO} is supposed to work.  But what if your sumti contains=20
> BOTH logical and non-logical connectives?  Example:=20
>
>   {le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu joi le xekri .e le blabi}=20
>
>   or even:=20
>
>   {le xunre joibo le crino .ebo le blanu .e le xekri joi le blabi}=20
>
> So, my questions are:=20
>
>  (1) Are the logical connectives (eks, jeks, etc.) and non-logical=20
>      connectives (JOI, BIhI, etc.) treated the same when it comes to=20
>      pairing-off connected sumti? =20


Yes.
=20

> Or are, for example, the non-logical=20
>      connectives given higher precedence than the logical connectives?=20
>      (A higher precedence for non-logical connectives would make it=20
>      easier to transform a bridi containing the sumti into=20
>      logically-connected bridi containing the non-logically-connected=20
>      component sumti.)=20
>
>
No.
=20

>  (2) Is a {BO} attached to a non-logical connective treated identically=
=20
>      to a {BO} attached to a logical connective?=20


Yes.
=20

>  Or does, for example,=20
>      a {BO} following {JOI} have higher precedence than a {BO} following=
=20
>      {A}?=20
>
>
No.

So I guess the problem comes from the difference between the basis for=20
defining the logical connectives and that for defining the non-logical=20
connectives.

Logical connectives are defined so that the truth value calculation can be=
=20
performed #[1]. Sumtis connected by logical connectives are expanded to=20
compound formulas. Logical connectives of sumtis without any selbrisni are=
=20
meaningless because a selbrisni is required to have a truth value.

#[1] ...though the CLL failed in some points. See paradoxes explained by=20
Xorxes and me at URLs below.
https://mw.lojban.org/papri/scope_of_na
https://mw.lojban.org/papri/na_go%27i/en

On the other hand, not all definitions of non-logical connectives are based=
=20
on the calculation of formulas. Meaning of some non-logical connectives=20
like joi seems to be defined based on sumti. No clear meaning is officially=
=20
defined for joi used as formula connective, though lojban users may use it=
=20
in a string and give a meaning to the string as long as it is grammatical.

That difference makes the meaning of mixed use of logical and non-logical=
=20
connectives unclear.

=20

> Lastly, I am confused about the role of {BO} in tensed logical=20
> connections, those of the form {A+PU+BO} or {JOI+PU+BO}.  I.e.,=20
>
>   {le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu .ebabo le xekri .ebo le blabi}=20
>
>   or even:=20
>
>   {le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu joi le xekri joibo le blabi}=20
>
> So, my third and final question:=20
>
>  (3) Does a {BO} required by a tensed connection {A+PU+BO} or {JOI+PU+BO}=
=20
>      (where the {BO} is NOT optional) have the same effect as a {BO} on=
=20
>      an untensed connective (where {BO}s are discretionary)?=20


Yes.
=20

>  Or are=20
>      tensed logical connectives treated as being {BO}-less?=20


No.
=20

>  By my=20
>      reading of the grammar, a tensed connection cannot be followed by=20
>      two consective {BO}s in a row, i.e. {.apubobo}, to disambiguate the=
=20
>      precedence intended.=20
>
> Yes, I realize that the pragmatic solution is just to disambiguate any=20
> potentially confusing connections using {KE}..{KEhE} parentheses.  But=20
> I'd like to know what the formal rules are for how these different kinds=
=20
> of connectives interact with each other and with the cmavo {BO}.  I=20
> can't find anyplace in the CLL which speaks to this kind of interaction.=
=20
>
> Much thanks in bo advance!=20
>

A tag like a tense can be inserted between a connective and a BO, but it=20
does not change the behavior of BO. A tag followed by no BO but a sumti or=
=20
a selbrisni forms a cluster. BO prevents that.

mi'e la guskant mu'o

=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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
lojban/af9a3c0c-0e98-445b-820a-4be67e9334f5%40googlegroups.com.

------=_Part_5954_676144739.1578476900343
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>Le mercredi 8 janvier 2020 05:46:43 UTC, scope845h=
...@icebubble.org a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left:=
 1ex;">coi rodo,
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>coi do</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left:=
 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>I have a couple of (3) questions about {BO} and how it behaves when it
<br>is used in a sumti containing both logical (A) and non-logical (JOI)
<br>connectives and/or tensed logical connections (A+PU+BO, JOI+PU+BO).
<br>
<br>(I thought about posting this to the Lojban Beginners&#39; list, but it
<br>didn&#39;t seem like a beginners&#39; question. =C2=A0Feel free to re-/=
cross-post if
<br>you think that appropriate.)
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu .e le xekri .e le blabi} means
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 &quot;(((the red and the green) and the blue) and the black) and=
 the white&quot;,
<br>=C2=A0 but {BO} increases connective precedence and reverses associativ=
ity, so
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre .e le crino .ebo le blanu .ebo le xekri .e le blabi} m=
eans
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 &quot;(the red and (the green and (the blue and the black))) and=
 the white&quot;.
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 This works with non-logical connectives, too, i.e.:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre joi le crino joibo le blanu joibo le xekri joi le blab=
i} means
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 &quot;(the red with (the green with (the blue with the black))) =
with the white&quot;.
<br>
<br>That&#39;s how {BO} is supposed to work. =C2=A0But what if your sumti c=
ontains
<br>BOTH logical and non-logical connectives? =C2=A0Example:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu joi le xekri .e le blabi}
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 or even:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre joibo le crino .ebo le blanu .e le xekri joi le blabi}
<br>
<br>So, my questions are:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0(1) Are the logical connectives (eks, jeks, etc.) and non-logical
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0connectives (JOI, BIhI, etc.) treated the same when=
 it comes to
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0pairing-off connected sumti? =C2=A0</blockquote><di=
v><br></div><div>Yes.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quot=
e" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;paddin=
g-left: 1ex;">Or are, for example, the non-logical
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0connectives given higher precedence than the logica=
l connectives?
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(A higher precedence for non-logical connectives wo=
uld make it
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0easier to transform a bridi containing the sumti in=
to
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0logically-connected bridi containing the non-logica=
lly-connected
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0component sumti.)
<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">=C2=A0(2) Is a {BO} attached to a non-logi=
cal connective treated identically
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0to a {BO} attached to a logical connective? </block=
quote><div><br></div><div>Yes.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc sol=
id;padding-left: 1ex;">=C2=A0Or does, for example,
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0a {BO} following {JOI} have higher precedence than =
a {BO} following
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0{A}?
<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>No.</div><div><br></div><div><div>So I=
 guess the problem comes from the difference between the basis for defining=
 the logical connectives and that for defining the non-logical connectives.=
</div><div><br></div><div>Logical connectives are defined so that the truth=
 value calculation can be performed #[1]. Sumtis connected by logical conne=
ctives are expanded to compound formulas. Logical connectives of sumtis wit=
hout any selbrisni are meaningless because a selbrisni is required to have =
a truth value.</div><div><br></div><div>#[1] ...though the CLL failed in so=
me points. See paradoxes explained by Xorxes and me at URLs below.</div><di=
v>https://mw.lojban.org/papri/scope_of_na</div><div>https://mw.lojban.org/p=
apri/na_go%27i/en</div><div><br></div><div>On the other hand, not all defin=
itions of non-logical connectives are based on the calculation of formulas.=
 Meaning of some non-logical connectives like joi seems to be defined based=
 on sumti. No clear meaning is officially defined for joi used as formula c=
onnective, though lojban users may use it in a string and give a meaning to=
 the string as long as it is grammatical.</div><div><br></div><div>That dif=
ference makes the meaning of mixed use of logical and non-logical connectiv=
es unclear.</div></div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc s=
olid;padding-left: 1ex;">Lastly, I am confused about the role of {BO} in te=
nsed logical
<br>connections, those of the form {A+PU+BO} or {JOI+PU+BO}. =C2=A0I.e.,
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu .ebabo le xekri .ebo le bl=
abi}
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 or even:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0 {le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu joi le xekri joibo le blab=
i}
<br>
<br>So, my third and final question:
<br>
<br>=C2=A0(3) Does a {BO} required by a tensed connection {A+PU+BO} or {JOI=
+PU+BO}
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(where the {BO} is NOT optional) have the same effe=
ct as a {BO} on
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0an untensed connective (where {BO}s are discretiona=
ry)? </blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: =
1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">=C2=A0Or are
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0tensed logical connectives treated as being {BO}-le=
ss? </blockquote><div><br></div><div>No.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">=C2=A0By my
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0reading of the grammar, a tensed connection cannot =
be followed by
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0two consective {BO}s in a row, i.e. {.apubobo}, to =
disambiguate the
<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0precedence intended.
<br>
<br>Yes, I realize that the pragmatic solution is just to disambiguate any
<br>potentially confusing connections using {KE}..{KEhE} parentheses. =C2=
=A0But
<br>I&#39;d like to know what the formal rules are for how these different =
kinds
<br>of connectives interact with each other and with the cmavo {BO}. =C2=A0=
I
<br>can&#39;t find anyplace in the CLL which speaks to this kind of interac=
tion.
<br>
<br>Much thanks in bo advance!
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>A tag like a tense can be inserted bet=
ween a connective and a BO, but it does not change the behavior of BO. A ta=
g followed by no BO but a sumti or a selbrisni forms a cluster. BO prevents=
 that.</div><div><br></div><div>mi&#39;e la guskant mu&#39;o</div><div><br>=
</div><div>=C2=A0</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 view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msgid/lojban/af9a3c0c-0e98-445b-820a-4be67e9334f5%40googlegroups.com?u=
tm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lo=
jban/af9a3c0c-0e98-445b-820a-4be67e9334f5%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br />

------=_Part_5954_676144739.1578476900343--

------=_Part_5953_563696925.1578476900343--