Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qObFA-000022C; Fri, 15 Jul 94 03:35 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1242; Fri, 15 Jul 94 03:33:45 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1237; Fri, 15 Jul 1994 03:33:44 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1605; Fri, 15 Jul 1994 02:32:54 +0200 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 1994 10:32:52 +1000 Reply-To: Nick NICHOLAS Sender: Lojban list From: Nick NICHOLAS Subject: Re: cukta X-To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK X-cc: Lojban Mailing List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199407150007.2801@krang.vis.mu.OZ.AU> from "ucleaar" at Jul 14, 94 11:05:12 pm Content-Length: 1101 Lines: 22 Hu'tegh! nuq ja' ucleaar jay'? =A couple of years ago I wrote on Lojban list that it would be in keeping =with the explicitness of the description of Lojban syntax and that =part of semantics treatable in formal, logical ways, if the meanings =of gismu (and lujvo etc) were given explicit prototype definitions. =That is, to me the spirit of the Lojban enterprise is its explicitness, =not its use of logic, or what have you. I suppose I didn't know about prototype semantics back then; now that I do --- you, And, are a *legend*! (Well, you'd have to be. Aren't you the only professional linguist on this list? ;) ). You're absolutely right. In fact, combining Natural Semantic Metalanguage (to give your definitions a grounding in primitives) with Prototype semantics *and* predicate logic... wow. The world is our oyster. I *strongly* recommend people (including you, Lojbab ;)) have a look at Anna Wierzbicka's Dictionary of Speech Act Verbs. I think it shows what And's envisaged deluxe dictionary should look like. And I strongly think it would be linguistically very worthwhile work. Nick.