Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:03:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199804101703.NAA03392@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Sender: Lojban list From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" Subject: Re: Lojban ML: Syllogism and sophism X-To: lojban To: John Cowan X-UIDL: 4270ef1b53b07c447489b6dbf7f6b5f3 X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 Status: RO Content-Length: 1641 Lines: 42 Lojbab: >>>>> If we want the ambiguitry of English, why bother using Lojban? >>>>English is as capable of disambiguation as is Lojban, isn't it? >>>I don't think so. Every expression which disambiguates in English is >>>itself ambiguous. >>Yes, and every expression which disambiguates in Lojban is >>itself ambiguous as well. > >English words have a surfeit of polysemy, in addition to the large >quantity of grammatical ambiguity. I am not sure that it is possible >to resolve either of these kinds of ambiguity without introducing new >kinds if only through the polysemy of other English words. Advantage >therefore to Lojban, which so far has minimal polysemy. Lojban certainly has far less polysemy than English. And yet English is as capable of disambiguation as is Lojban, isn't it? >>The problem with {ni}, as we already discussed, is that it is also >>defined to be something else, a number. {le ni marji} is variously >>defined to be like {le ka grake} and like {le se grake}. > >le se grake could be a measurement of leni ko'a marji. The degree to which >something is composed of matter is its mass, which is measured on a scale of >grams. Right, that is one of the definitions of {ni}. The other one is that of chapter 11, example 5.3 of the refgrammar, where it is stated that {le ni} is the number on the scale, rather than the property being measured. >As I have repeatedly said, my concept of slabu as age i slabu be loi >jmive prenu. But "well known to some alive people" is not equivalent to old as age. > But if you don't like this there is always >to'ercitno Yes, or {tolci'o} for short. co'o mi'e xorxes