From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Oct 31 02:51:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 20034 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2006 10:49:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.36) by m28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 31 Oct 2006 10:49:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Oct 2006 10:49:38 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GerB5-0007lD-EW for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:49:10 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GerAD-0007kL-61; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:48:20 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:48:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ger9X-0007ju-4W for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:47:32 -0800 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ger9O-0007jh-Tg for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:47:29 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 23so1397283ugr for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:47:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.158.11 with SMTP id g11mr6534719hue; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.124.16 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 02:47:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:47:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3442_3522377.1162291640881" References: X-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--) X-archive-position: 12858 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: andrii.z@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: "Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin" From: "Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin" Reply-To: andrii.z@gmail.com Subject: [lojban] Re: reform X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=cpXMVLRTpzG_w0H9wvEsV-_h8RofMUSOdeUbFaZoFZVTiML8Qw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27298 ------=_Part_3442_3522377.1162291640881 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline well, I don't claim that we should take any features away, actually I was thinking we should add some features like: - onomatopoeia, we have to have them, how else can you tell a knock knock joke.ui.u'i? - standard way to describe shapes - with some gIsmu, having cmEne, rAfsi, we can differentiate them better, just takes a little of the ambiguity out, but gives you a lot more control because its a name, like la .ueb, which means the World Wide Web. - C and Pascal are imperative languages, they have little to nothing to do with human languages - Lojban is a predicate logic language, so it's based on predicate logic, just like sentences in most rarbau (note rar, natural, a subjective gIsmu with many possibilities in meanings, bau not really subjective, mis-interpretation can only be achieved through ignorance). - Prolog is a predicate logic language, so no different from lojban, instead of .e they use ',' and instead of .a they use ';' , things like that - This really isn't all that radical. On 10/31/06, Yanis Batura wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin" > To: lojban-list@lojban.org > Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:47:37 -0500 > Subject: [lojban] reform > > > > > lOjban is great, but it's not as logical as it could be. For the next > major > > revision, should we modify lOjban, or should we call it something else? > > > > ... > > There are languages for human interaction, and there are languages for > instructing machines what to do. Humans are intelligent, and can resolve > from context syntactical and semantical ambiguities. Machines (so far) are > not, and require syntactical and semantical unambiguity, hence the formal > languages for them. > > There are no (and cannot be) unambiguous languages for human interaction. > Lojban is intended for humans. It is perhaps the closest language to > computer formal languages due to its syntactical unambiguity. But it is not > a computer formal language in the sense of C or Pascal or the like. > > You don't like many features of Lojban that make it semantically > ambiguous, and suggest to eliminate them. Well, this will transform it to > just another computer language (be it a pronounceable one), inappropriate > for human interaction. What use will it be of? > > mi'e .ianis > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help. > > -- ta'o(by the way) We With You Network at: http://lokiworld.org .i(and) more on Lojban: http://lojban.org mu'oimi'e lOkadin (Over, my name is lOkadin) ------=_Part_3442_3522377.1162291640881 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline well, I don't claim that we should take any features away,


actually I was thinking we should add some features like:

  • onomatopoeia, we have to have them, how else can you tell a knock knock joke.ui.u 'i?
  • standard way to describe shapes
  • with some gIsmu, having cmEne, rAfsi, we can differentiate them better, just takes a little of the ambiguity out, but gives you a lot more control because its a name, like la .ueb, which means the World Wide Web.
  • C and Pascal are imperative languages, they have little to nothing to do with human languages
  • Lojban is a predicate logic language,  so it's based on predicate logic, just like sentences in most rarbau (note rar, natural, a subjective gIsmu with many possibilities in meanings,  bau not really subjective, mis-interpretation can only be achieved through ignorance).
  • Prolog is a predicate logic language, so no different from lojban, instead of .e they use ',' and instead of .a they use ';' , things like that
  • This really isn't all that radical.


On 10/31/06, Yanis Batura <ybatura@mail.ru> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: "Andrii (lOkadin) Zvorygin" <andrii.z@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:47:37 -0500
Subject: [lojban] reform

>
> lOjban is great, but it's not as logical as it could be. For the next major
> revision, should we modify lOjban, or should we call it something else?
>
> ...

There are languages for human interaction, and there are languages for instructing machines what to do. Humans are intelligent, and can resolve from context syntactical and semantical ambiguities. Machines (so far) are not, and require syntactical and semantical unambiguity, hence the formal languages for them.

There are no (and cannot be) unambiguous languages for human interaction. Lojban is intended for humans. It is perhaps the closest language to computer formal languages due to its syntactical unambiguity. But it is not a computer formal language in the sense of C or Pascal or the like.

You don't like many features of Lojban that make it semantically ambiguous, and suggest to eliminate them. Well, this will transform it to just another computer language (be it a pronounceable one), inappropriate for human interaction. What use will it be of?

mi'e .ianis


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.




--
ta'o(by the way)  We With You Network at: http://lokiworld.org .i(and)
more on Lojban: http://lojban.org
mu'oimi'e lOkadin (Over, my name is lOkadin) ------=_Part_3442_3522377.1162291640881--