From ben@goertzel.org Fri Apr 08 19:29:12 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: ben@goertzel.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 48209 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2005 02:29:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Apr 2005 02:29:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intelligenesiscorp.com) (208.234.8.229) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2005 02:29:11 -0000 Received: from zombiethustra (pcp06586041pcs.nrockv01.md.comcast.net [69.140.24.121]) by intelligenesiscorp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id j392Sph1032553; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:28:54 -0400 To: , Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:08 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_026C_01C53C8A.6123B290" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20050408232435.GR26545@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Originating-IP: 208.234.8.229 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 From: "Ben Goertzel" Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: Semantics of lojban and glibau, and Lojban FrameNet revisited X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1278257 X-Yahoo-Profile: bgoertzel X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24159 ------=_NextPart_000_026C_01C53C8A.6123B290 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree that sometimes the results of a formalized place structure would suck ass... [p.s. I was tempted to check your Sex Code listed on your website to see if you think "sucking ass" is a good or a bad thing ;-D ;-p] But the question is, what percentage of the time would it be good? If it's good 90% of the time, then it's worth systematizing things and explicitly listing exceptions If it's good 60% of the time, then the systematization isn't worthwhile... My suspicion is that it would be good 80-90% of the time, but I'm far from certain... I guess your intuition is different? You'd know better than me I suppose... -- Ben G -----[on systematizing lujvo] > Taking this kind of approach to defining argument structures would > seem to reduce the risk of odd inconsistencies occurring in the > dictionary of argument-structures... I'm curious why a systematic > approach like this wasn't taken in constructing the Lojban > dictionary, since Lojbanoidic folks seem so interested in order > and systematicity... it's odd that the argument-structures are > only imperfectly and informally systematized, no? The reason is that sometimes the results of a formalized place structure suck ass. :-) -Robin ------=_NextPart_000_026C_01C53C8A.6123B290 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
I=20 agree that sometimes the results of a formalized place structure would suck= =20 ass...
 
[p.s.=20 I was tempted to check your Sex Code listed on your website to see if you t= hink=20 "sucking ass" is a good or a bad thing ;-D ;-p]
 
But=20 the question is, what percentage of the time would it be=20 good?
 
If=20 it's good 90% of the time, then it's worth systematizing things and explici= tly=20 listing exceptions
 
If=20 it's good 60% of the time, then the systematization isn't=20 worthwhile...
 
My=20 suspicion is that it would be good 80-90% of the time, but I'm far from=20 certain...
 
I=20 guess your intuition is different?  You'd know better than me I=20 suppose...
 
-- Ben=20 G
 
 
-----[on systematizing lujvo]
> Taking this kin= d of=20 approach to defining argument structures would
> seem to reduce the= risk=20 of odd inconsistencies occurring in the
> dictionary of=20 argument-structures... I'm curious why a systematic
> approach like= this=20 wasn't taken in constructing the Lojban
> dictionary, since Lojbano= idic=20 folks seem so interested in order
> and systematicity... it's odd t= hat=20 the argument-structures are
> only imperfectly and informally=20 systematized, no?

The reason is that sometimes the results of a=20 formalized place
structure suck ass.

:-)

-Robin
=
------=_NextPart_000_026C_01C53C8A.6123B290--