Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 173.13.139.236 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=173.13.139.236;
From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Proof that Lojban morphology is unambiguous
To: Lojban List <lojban-list@lojban.org>
References: <86tuyhcx9s.fsf@cmarib.ramside> <865z9z7dyr.fsf@cmarib.ramside>
 <20200803200414.76kso6gwhu2rnlig@renro>
Message-ID: <df6b1b64-74e9-d147-9fcb-5fba3ecf56d9@lojban.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:41:21 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200803200414.76kso6gwhu2rnlig@renro>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -
X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=neutral
 (google.com: 173.13.139.236 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess
 record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mailfrom=lojbab@lojban.org
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Spam-Checked-In-Group: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <https://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <https://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <https://groups.google.com/group/lojban
List-Subscribe: <https://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <https://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe>
X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)
X-Spam_score: -2.7
X-Spam_score_int: -26
X-Spam_bar: --

On 8/3/2020 4:04 PM, Jacob Thomas Errington wrote:
> I don't believe there is a proof out there, but it is by no means
> taboo to question whether Lojban actually achieves its stated goals.
> 
> To prove that the morphology is unambiguous, one would have to write
> an algorithm that accepts an idealized representation of a speech
> stream and decomposes it into a sequence of words. The algorithm would
> not be able to consult a dictionary to do so.
> 
> If you're interested in working on this, I'd be interested in hearing
> about it.
> 
> mu'o mi'e la tsani

Nora also noticed that Pierre (phma) has his own effort at a 
wordbreaking algorithm, "valfendi" on github.  We are not sure where it 
fits relative to brkwords put probably was later, though preceding 
whatever was incorporated in camxes (one of the attempted post YACC 
parsers which IIRC tried to handle speech streams)

lojbab

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/df6b1b64-74e9-d147-9fcb-5fba3ecf56d9%40lojban.org.