From lojbab@lojban.org Mon Dec 17 23:30:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 18 Dec 2001 07:30:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 40885 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2001 07:30:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2001 07:30:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-4.cais.net) (205.252.14.74) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Dec 2001 07:30:24 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (dynamic202.cl8.cais.net [205.177.20.202]) by stmpy-4.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fBI7UMH65966 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:30:22 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011218021856.00c40680@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 02:29:18 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Logical translation request In-Reply-To: <20011218051445.GB552@twcny.rr.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20011217224458.00c27aa0@pop.cais.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217201146.00c278d0@pop.cais.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217224458.00c27aa0@pop.cais.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 12646 At 12:14 AM 12/18/01 -0500, Rob Speer wrote: >On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 10:45:47PM -0500, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote: > > It can, but as naujeki (or naujoiki) > >Is there any particular reason for this? Similarly, for the CAhA selma'o >and the fact that CAhA + NAI is ungrammatical? Probably it is ungrammatical either because a) we never thought of adding a rule for CAhA+NAI because we couldn't think of what such a thing might mean, or b) we couldn't make it work in YACC. >I've probably expressed this before, but I think that the separation of >tense selma'o is going to be the first thing to go when the baseline >ends - which would for the most part bring the language more in line >with usage anyway, and with the goal to remove restrictions on thought. If it goes, then we return to the TLI Loglan state where any agglomeration of tense words is a tense, whether or not it could possibly mean anything. We tried to err on the side of over-specification - at one point PA was several selma'o so that we could rule out invalid "number" strings and thereby make other number strings more meaningful. We could not devise an unambiguous grammar for numbers in multiple selma'o so we abandoned the effort. In contrast, we have a grammar for tenses that works and is only clumsy when you push it in new directions. It is more flexible and powerful than any natlang tense system, and it was the best we could do. The different selma'o within the tense system DO reflect distinctions in meaning. Sometimes unrelated words ended up in one selma'o (as cu'e and nau) because we could not think of a difference in how they would be used. But a CAhA is not a CA or a TAhE, and whatever a CAhA+NAI might mean is not determined by parallels with those other selma'o. Hence it is a separate selma'o 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