From 3KY3DSwkJBsUlyo.2z34lrxltw.nzxwzumlyrzzrwpr2z503.nzx@groups.bounces.google.com Mon Apr 12 14:14:38 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f140.google.com ([209.85.210.140]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <3KY3DSwkJBsUlyo.2z34lrxltw.nzxwzumlyrzzrwpr2z503.nzx@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1O1Qxm-0004Lm-LO; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:38 -0700 Received: by yxe4 with SMTP id 4sf3281198yxe.28 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:28 -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-spf:received:received:received:message-id:date :from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references: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-transfer-encoding; bh=dlryg7jWwLbhNJxXz2SlkHjyoMCGQD2wJBWa59MQxFA=; b=Hj8Z1aYmTVN7ckhUjx73XXu+LCa/Razbn1BNMfFdz32k4I8dlJ11tUiB+ywpbYfVD1 qBmI+LNgIedHFPAlifhwYHZieG2Xk8fpqm55rqofkE4QiCQBBD4icox7fcRw6i2k+4bC VQitc1UPYWCqio28qjC3EW2DqLJ54IUsEDYC8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references: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-transfer-encoding; b=qLSE+SNJ7QrdvBgVWbzhGo1PMPU7utKMdAnmxTd1Bw3dFwe9dfeR34yuq/HvqEQ6qf lD6y0hHkMB7R8Z+tIigSULEWKaCpDvEAbdlOC9U9BGzxWR80aOoj4FGXtb24ICBV8/8f Inah4MNZTYrvx7G3QM0F01Fzg3I8HNY8rn1gc= Received: by 10.150.241.1 with SMTP id o1mr190655ybh.42.1271106857804; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:17 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.35.68 with SMTP id o4ls63250bkd.1.p; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.23.66 with SMTP id q2mr136310bkb.3.1271106856183; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.23.66 with SMTP id q2mr136309bkb.3.1271106856130; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f223.google.com (mail-bw0-f223.google.com [209.85.218.223]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 17si468344bwz.11.2010.04.12.14.14.15; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.218.223; Received: by mail-bw0-f223.google.com with SMTP id 23so2378894bwz.6 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.45.201 with SMTP id g9mr5240059bkf.89.1271106854694; Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.67] (87-194-76-9.bethere.co.uk [87.194.76.9]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s17sm40856907bkd.10.2010.04.12.14.14.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BC38D24.10608@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:14:12 +0100 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] The efficacy of Lojban's grammar. 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> <20100412175849.GP20647@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20100412175849.GP20647@digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@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/c67f210addc06a0c X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/15e051753c835582 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Robin Lee Powell, On 12/04/2010 18:58: > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 02:51:17PM +0100, And Rosta wrote: >> I don't doubt that the great majority of expert Lojban speakers' >> utterances are passed as licit by the formal parser. But I do >> doubt that the licitness of those utterances is due to the Lojban >> speaker having internalized the formal grammar and making active >> use of it during sentence processing. >=20 > That is certainly my internal experience. >=20 >> I wager that syntactic structures that would be assigned to Lojban >> sentences by (1) syntacticians and (2) Lojban speakers would >> differ very substantially from the syntactic structures assigned >> by the formal grammar.=20 >=20 > I can't speak to (1), but my structures would differ significantly > only by missing parts. >=20 >> The situation is rather as though human speakers when faced with >> an impossibly inhuman grammar construct internally an entirely >> new, human language with approximately equivalent weak generative >> capacity (i.e. gives thumbs up and down to the same candidate >> sentences as the formal grammar does). >=20 > I think you're full of shit, and I'd appreciate it if you would not > continue to try to tell me what goes on in my head. Hopefully I can evade your wrath by not talking about your mind in particul= ar? But remember that neither of us know that much about what's going on in= your mind when speaking Lojban. You have the limited benefit of introspect= ion, and I have the questionable benefit of a decent knowledge about syntax= and sketchy knowledge about psycholinguistics, which may be relevant. At any rate, I will readily concede that somebody could learn the formal gr= ammar and then apply it by sheer brute-force brainpower. I guess you can te= st that by doing a quick pencil and paper parse and seeing if it matches th= e formal grammar. If you can (and I'm sure you and xorxes can), then it's a= t least possible that you're using brute-force brainpower. (But I note that= in another message you acknowledge you think you use a streamlined/pruned = version, which I find easier to believe). But anyway, in the general case, = bear in mind that the formal grammar isn't taught; it's not covered in CLL,= apart from the nondidactic Ch 21. And nobody could work out the formal gra= mmar inductively from usage. I'd still wager that almost all Lojban users u= se their linguistic faculty in syntactic processing rather than only brute-= force brainpower, and operate with some fairly natural-language-like gramma= r derived to varying extents from CLL Ch 21, CLL Ch 2 and similar, and natu= ral language a nalogies (gadri =3D articles, sumti =3D noun phrases, selbri =3D verbs, etc= .). --And. --=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.