From 3wOi7SwsJBrAWVRUhUiVehTWcQYb.SecbeZRQdWeeWbUWhekfi.Sec@groups.bounces.google.com Tue Apr 06 19:07:21 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f198.google.com ([209.85.217.198]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3wOi7SwsJBrAWVRUhUiVehTWcQYb.SecbeZRQdWeeWbUWhekfi.Sec@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1NzKfl-0001cx-F5 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:07:21 -0700 Received: by gxk22 with SMTP id 22sf271507gxk.4 for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:07:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received:received-spf:received:mime-version:in-reply-to :received:message-id:date:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=M3Y34pqSyxHJXdUV2/P1VKkzfwbIl89/ZBqtY8HZM9Q=; b=ig+WwVf26xRPU3cImU2VSNPr4vgoq7F5BXbltZcyGa1WIOtp/g3xW2ErQSaBcpsx0Y MVWm7XZhyBwRiVeq4lbWteUKOl5RhhAzzs4ELlGGLTjkcZcITmpPz4hYIujElV5NrM+D zjLv/mjeFcnsPobXCO5tU3f3T9nAYWqb0//Tg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id:date :subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=krirwMw7wXH4fLTT6OB1V5zNSnc+OO+QYrof89sIB41Ii/zhmRvCu2JxEI31IiEdSx bFka+nPYV+PGkAQPcgU0TGTYrEPLod2xpxlxZmgX5ijlZSswZb/f6DkPh8e2rXouKa11 OP0PYX6D+6lAOQlmctdiQ8xNK7ao5nK+S2qLU= Received: by 10.91.181.11 with SMTP id i11mr572682agp.0.1270606016409; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:06:56 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.87.8.39 with SMTP id l39ls525946fgi.2.p; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.87.19.38 with SMTP id w38mr488671fgi.2.1270606014888; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.74.16 with SMTP id s16mr737560ebj.29.1270603815447; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.74.16 with SMTP id s16mr737559ebj.29.1270603815407; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f232.google.com (mail-ew0-f232.google.com [209.85.219.232]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si884318ewy.4.2010.04.06.18.30.15; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of GFBeresford@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.232 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.232; Received: by ewy18 with SMTP id 18so37977ewy.8 for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:30:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Received: by 10.213.81.18 with SMTP id v18mr745996ebk.7.1270603815060; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <00c09f76ad870c0d9e04839b81ae@google.com> Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:30:15 +0000 Subject: Re: [lojban] Tangent: Is there a better grammar? From: GFBeresford@gmail.com To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of GFBeresford@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.232 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=GFBeresford@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: gfberesford@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/6d4e31b897cbe4b1 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/5c6fb881b32b5bce Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f76ad870c0d8104839b81ab --00c09f76ad870c0d8104839b81ab Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes I know *someone* tried to make a language similar to lojban using the asian tonal system. This would certainly allow shorter utterances, since there are WAY more one-syllable sounds available... though it isn't really an improved grammar, just a different alphabet... On Apr 7, 2010 2:14am, Oren wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 01:03, And Rosta and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote: > [* As I see it, the design problem has two parts. Both have to do with > finding ways to logically precise meanings concise enough to be worth the > effort of verbalizing. One part is to find a more concise way of of > encoding variables than standard predicate logic notation and Lojban > offer, given that in most propositions we express (in natural language) > there are many variables and each variable tends to be argument of many > predicates. The other part is to devise an inventory of predicates that > expand to more complex logical structures.] > I don't really see your case here; if one of the basic goals is to be a > useful human language, then I don't see any alternative to predicate > logic as two-dimensional representation of utterances. Or, if there was > one. it would seem inherently illogical due to it's complexity. Could you > (or anyone) expand this thought? > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --00c09f76ad870c0d8104839b81ab Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I know *someone* tried to make a language similar to lojban using the asian= tonal system. This would certainly allow shorter utterances, since there a= re WAY more one-syllable sounds available... though it isn't really an = improved grammar, just a different alphabet...



On Ap= r 7, 2010 2:14am, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, = Apr 7, 2010 at 01:03, And Rosta and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> [* As I see it, the design problem has two parts. Both = have to do with finding ways to logically precise meanings concise enough t= o be worth the effort of verbalizing. One part is to find a more concise wa= y of of encoding variables than standard predicate logic notation and Lojba= n offer, given that in most propositions we express (in natural language) t= here are many variables and each variable tends to be argument of many pred= icates. The other part is to devise an inventory of predicates that expand = to more complex logical structures.]
>
>
>
= > I don't really see your case here; if one of the basic goals is to= be a useful human language, then I don't see any alternative to predic= ate logic as two-dimensional representation of utterances. Or, if there was= one. it would seem inherently illogical due to it's complexity. Could = you (or anyone) expand this thought?
>
>
>
= >
>
>
>
>
> --
> <= br />> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl= e Groups "lojban" group.
>
> To post to this gro= up, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
>
> To unsubscr= ibe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>
>
> For more options, visit this group at http://g= roups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--00c09f76ad870c0d8104839b81ab--