From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Wed Jun 28 22:55:19 1995 Received: from punt3.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3648 ; Wed, 28 Jun 95 22:55:15 BST Received: from punt3.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Tue, 27 Jun 95 22:44:59 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt3.demon.co.uk id aa03898; 27 Jun 95 23:44 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9021; Tue, 27 Jun 95 18:42:31 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7217; Tue, 27 Jun 1995 18:36:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 23:36:07 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: TECH: AFTERTHOUGHT SCOPE X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506272344.aa03898@punt3.demon.co.uk> Status: R Here is a discussion paper on afterthought scope. It discusses what we should be able to do scopewise in afterthought, and possible ways of doing it. I think it requires about 6 to 9 new cmavo, all in existing selmao, plus perhaps some optional extras in UI. AFTERTHOUGHT SCOPE 1. SCOPE-SENSITIVITY SCOPE-SENSITIVE terms comprise all sumti whose innermost descriptor is (implicitly or explicitly) {lo}. SCOPE-INSENSITIVE terms comprise all sumti whose innermost descriptor is {le}. At this stage I'm ignoring {la}, {lai}, {lahi}, {loi}, {lohi}, {lei} and {lehi}. I'm also ignoring {na} and coordinators. Relative scope between two terms matters if at least one of them is scope-sensitive. (An exception to this is <{suo lo},{suo lo}> and <{ro lo},{ro lo}> pairs: the relative scope of these makes no difference to the meaning. I shall ignore this exception.) 2. POSSIBLE SCOPES FOR A PAIR OF TERMS 2.1 SCOPE-INSENSITIVE + SCOPE-INSENSITIVE Scope is not an issue here. {le ci nanmu cu batci le re gerku} means that each of a certain three men bit each of a certain three dogs. 2.2 SCOPE-INSENSITIVE + SCOPE-SENSITIVE There are two possibilities here. 2.2.1 {le ci nanmu} has scope over {re gerku} {le ci nanmu cu batci re gerku} "Ax, x in C (a certain cimei): x is man, Ey, y a remei, Az, z in y: z is dog, x bite z" There are exactly three men, and up to six dogs. "Ax" precedes "Ey" 2.2.2 {le ci nanmu} does not have scope over {re gerku} {re gerku cu se batci le ci nanmu} "Ey, y a remei, Az, z in y: z is dog, Ax, x in C (a certain cimei): x is man, x bite z" There are exactly three men and exactly two dogs. "Ey" precedes "Ax" The relevant scope difference is whether the "Ax" precedes or follows the "Ey". 2.3 SCOPE-SENSITIVE + SCOPE-SENSITIVE There are three possibilities here. 2.3.1 {ci nanmu} has scope over {re gerku} {ci nanmu cu batci re gerku} "Ew, w a cimei, Ax, x in w: x is man, Ey, y a remei, Az, z in y: z is dog, x bite z" There are exactly three men and up to six dogs. "Ew" precedes "Az" "Ax" precedes "Ey" 2.3.2 {re gerku} has scope over {ci nanmu} {re gerku cu se batci ci nanmu} "Ey, y a remei, Az, z in y: z is dog, Ew, w a cimei, Ax, x in w: x is man, x bite z" There are exactly two dogs men and up to six men. "Ey" precedes "Ax" "Az" precedes "Ew" 2.3.3 {ci nanmu} and {re gerku} have coordinate scope {ci da poi nanmu e re de poi gerku zohu da batci de} "Ew, w a cimei, Ey, y a remei, Ax, x in w, Az, z in y: x is man, z is dog, x bite z" There are exactly three men and exactly two dogs. "Ew" precedes "Az" "Ey" precedes "Ax" 3 KINDS OF AFTERTHOUGHT SCOPE I suggest that we have devices for indicating the following: * the scope of a scope-sensitive sumti relative to another specified sumti * the scope of a scope-insensitive sumti relative to another specified scope-sensitive sumti The specified sumti can be * specified by an anaphor (pro-form) * the first term in a specified prenex * the last term in a specified prenex [Where the prenex (i) contains only what has been put in it so far, and (ii) can be implicit.] The 5 kinds of scope (defined above) are: * X and Y have coordinate scope [X and Y are scope-sensitive] * X has scope over Y [Y is scope-sensitive] * Y has scope over X [X is scope-sensitive] * X doesn't have scope over Y [X is scope-insensitive, Y is scope-sensitive] * Y doesn't have scope over X [X is scope-sensitive, Y is scope-insensitive] For the parsimoniously minded, the last two aren't strictly necessary. 4 SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 4.1 Scope relative to another sumti specified by an anaphor Add 5 new cmavo in GOI, one cmavo for each of the 5 kinds of scope. {SUMTI-X GOI SUMTI-Y} means "X is in the specified scope relationship with Y". 4.2 Scope relative to the first/last term in a specified prenex Define the following anaphoric possibilities: X is the { first | last } term in the prenex of Y where Y, working recursively, is either the { outermost | localmost } bridi or the bridi one level of embedding toward the middle of the bridi hierarchy away from Y Thus we need the following cmavo: * the outermost bridi - GOhA * the localmost bridi - GOhA [this exists, as {nei}] * the bridi one level of embedding toward the middle of the bridi hierarchy away from ... - LAhE (1) * the first term in the prenex of - LAhE (2) * the last term in the prenex of - LAhE (2) [i.e. in total, 3 new cmavo in LAhE, and 1 new cmavo in GOhA] These can then be used with GOI as in 4.1. The structure would be: SUMTI-1 GOI LAhE (2) (LAhE (1))* GOhA 5 ABBREVIATORY DEVICES Define a set of cmavo in UI that toggle between current scope defaults. Where X precedes Y: X has scope over Y / Y has scope over X / X and Y are coordinate --- And