Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000517232539.00b1aac0@127.0.0.1>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 23:44:22 -0400
To: lojban@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] More on lojban programatic semantics: Strong typing and  inferencing of types
In-Reply-To: <3923246E.F4F73A84@concentric.net>
References: <20000516214537.44864.qmail@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <lojbab@lojban.org>
Content-Length: 2444
Lines: 57

At 07:12 PM 05/17/2000 -0400, Brook Conner wrote:
>la xorxes. cusku di'e
> > la brukcr cusku di'e
> > >So, for example, you can use "poi" to annotate sumti with type
> > >information, or simply an appropriate selbri for "declaring" variables:
> > >
> > >ko jarco la stokuot. poi mekso -- show the "stock-quote", which is a
> > >mathematical expression
> >
> > For annotation {noi} is better than {poi}.
> > {la stokout poi mekso} would be used to restrict the reference to
> > {la stokuot} which is a mekso, as opposed to any other {la stokuot}
> > which is something else.
>
>Hmmm. You raise an interesting trade-off. Since noi is "incidental", it
>implies that there isn't another "la stokuot." somewhere that is
>actually a different kind of "la stokuot."

Not really.  The use of "la" means that I have some particular named 
"stokuot" in mind.  It doesn't imply anything about anyone I am not 
discussing.  The fact that I use "noi" means that I am presuming that the 
listener already has enough information to know who/what "la stokuot" 
refers to.

>  However, most PLs have
>scoping rules that allow multiple things of the same name - the scoping
>makes sure the referent of the name is always unambiguous.

The use of le or la by a Lojbanist means that he assumes that the referent 
is unambiguous to the listener, given context and previous knowledge.  If 
it is not, then he needs to provide restrictive information to make it 
unambiguous

>On the other hand, "poi" implies that the characteristic named is an
>*essential* aspect of the thing named - this is much closer to the
>meaning of a type in a PL.

No.  poi information need not be essential to the thing named.

John, who is the one sitting next to Jane, is my friend.

would use a poi clause in Lojban.  It is not an essential aspect of John 
that he sits next to Jane, it merely is a useful way to point him 
out.  Having pointed him out, but noting that the light is dim, I could 
add. "John, who has red hair, is tall." and the clause here would be 
translated into Lojban with "noi" because you already know who John is, and 
this is just incidental information.

lojbab
----
lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                    703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org