From lojban+bncCIGHwM2rDhDa-YPeBBoEjCsNqA@googlegroups.com Sat Apr 10 15:34:25 2010 Received: from mail-yw0-f137.google.com ([209.85.211.137]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1O0jFt-0001RE-91; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:34:25 -0700 Received: by ywh1 with SMTP id 1sf1051916ywh.28 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:34:14 -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:received:received:date:from :to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-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:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding; bh=grixQtGO+t0HQItrNtKEWt9Aor03I2wB4HW7FYzBkO0=; b=QB8VkZwxQ87xdvKYPuCxzbrONlA5hivsiUkib6WnqofkDU95CWpwQMnjjDGG0jYkHI O9jnie4EH34TQoj5FlWs+7fvgiXL55wiASv+NGBrUUvMuBXY92e7EM/WWkIDPuUfWSUU 2SLU2G4dDk8C1OEA/FaMR+TzmrgOfheFlDBfA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-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:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding; b=ZRlPXpwkjW8YNmsmn1bEk6kZutHsNsa0kU96SzGOf4Rqsf+6Uk9vzAgpN76BchaYDO 7P/QnmarJSO53WxdOJVpasv7C+jNoopZ4vb63pkMQR+5RKT9ZdNTnK9iR2h4rZ6pi94p 0pU6ylmnvfyAbda9Eq3abFuVN7opbp1XA3Td8= Received: by 10.90.125.12 with SMTP id x12mr350681agc.27.1270938842111; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:34:02 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.87.74.30 with SMTP id b30ls268614fgl.3.p; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.87.14.27 with SMTP id r27mr109944fgi.13.1270938840633; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.54.14 with SMTP id o14mr133312ebg.27.1270912937111; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.54.14 with SMTP id o14mr133311ebg.27.1270912937065; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f198.google.com (mail-pz0-f198.google.com [209.85.222.198]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 11si147037ewy.1.2010.04.10.08.22.16; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.222.198 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.222.198; Received: by pzk36 with SMTP id 36so3392295pzk.24 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.251.3 with SMTP id y3mr1599826rvh.227.1270912935622; Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [68.35.167.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm2069803pzk.7.2010.04.10.08.22.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 10 Apr 2010 08:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 09:22:12 -0600 From: Alan Post To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] The efficacy of Lojban's grammar. Message-ID: <20100410152212.GA7400@alice.local> References: <20100405210225.GW6084@digitalkingdom.org> <20100409002127.GA11541@digitalkingdom.org> <201004092108.00980.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4BBFDF2F.6050509@gmail.com> <20100410035904.GS11541@digitalkingdom.org> <4BC08255.1000201@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.222.198 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) smtp.mail=alanpost@sunflowerriver.org X-Original-Sender: alanpost@sunflowerriver.org 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/c67f210addc06a0c X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/9fb42f1f9cf354db Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 10:47:56AM -0400, Kevin Reid wrote: > On Apr 10, 2010, at 9:51, And Rosta wrote: >=20 > >I wager that syntactic structures that would be assigned to Lojban =20 > >sentences by (1) syntacticians and (2) Lojban speakers would differ =20 > >very substantially from the syntactic structures assigned by the =20 > >formal grammar. >=20 > [Disclaimer: I Am Not A Linguist.] >=20 > In my experience developing software which works with the results of =20 > parsing using formal grammar (well, the PEG version), the trees =20 > produced by the formal grammar are not like how I internally think of =20 > Lojban grammar, but insofar as they are, *they aren't what I would =20 > design as a formal AST for Lojban either*. >=20 > In particular, the trees have a huge number of nodes which pertain =20 > only to the implementation structure of the grammar and are both =20 > redundant and unrelated to the semantics of Lojban. This falls out =20 > from the fact that the parser produces one tree node per nonterminal, =20 > named according to that nonterminal, unconditionally: no appropriate =20 > specialized actions/transformations have been defined. >=20 > There are two major problems with the usefulness of the produced parse = =20 > trees: >=20 > 1. There are many nodes with exactly one child which reflect rules =20 > that > exist only due to the factoring of the grammar, or nested cases =20 > in order > to produce the proper parse tree for various optional clauses =20 > which > usually don't exist. >=20 > 2. The nodes are named according to the nonterminal, not according =20 > to the > matched rule. This means that the names reflect the syntactic =20 > role, the > slot it fills, rather than what the slot was filled with. The =20 > result of > this is that an interpretation of a given subtree has be =20 > inferred from > the number and kind of child nodes rather than an actual symbol =20 > in the > tree. >=20 > Particularly, note that the second problem is because the information =20 > *simply does not exist* in a formal system. The formal grammar(s) we =20 > have are simply defined to accept/reject sentences; the information =20 > about "what are these particular alternatives called" exists only =20 > informally in the CLL and other semantic-description documents. >=20 > So: >=20 > I agree that the formal grammar produces weird structures. >=20 > However, I believe it would be possible to create a parser, or =20 > transform the output of the current parser(s), such that the structure = =20 > *is* similar to what a syntactician, or a Lojban speaker who is =20 > familiar with parsers and formal grammars (such as for programming =20 > languages), would assign. >=20 > Furthermore, I believe this particular project *should* be done, as it = =20 > would (a) aid the development of computer software which interprets =20 > Lojban, and (b) be a useful tool in discussing =93what does this Lojban = =20 > sentence mean=94 and making sure that the semantics of Lojban are fully = =20 > defined. >=20 Kevin, Thank you for this. I was writing C code for many years before I began to study the grammar, and my experience of learning the formal grammar for C was one of joy--I saw the language in an entirely new way and I think it made me a better programmer. I've struggled understanding the formal grammar for Lojban, and I've assumed it was my inexperience as a whole with the language. I certainly plan for some part of my future study of Lojban to include a more rigorous understanding of the formal grammar, but your hints hear really speak to why the technique I've used so far to understand it has been difficult. And +1 on your suggestion of transforming the grammar into something that would be easier to write software for interpretation. I can peform my future study with an eye toward this as well. Thank you! -Alan --=20 te djuno lo do sevzi --=20 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.