From lojban+bncCL-Ey5qiChDUz5TpBBoE6W8IUw@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 05 18:24:35 2011 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PafWh-0005Ay-Cb; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:35 -0800 Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35sf17593271wyb.16 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:24 -0800 (PST) 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:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=o7EpAlwj9upr27gGiZL80CmtXN0D30fOIC1plSHxmCk=; b=AM6CypKWr003yoCZHEey4aY7x1weqISkqOz9L8jUHcaTDH5+Xi1YpwBcmcLetPIAka 9Sa2Hpcg50nJ6+2Wowi8GEyDNsaNG+LKiCZbC7E/zwT+144p1SnHX3eeyKBsPozz6Zcl Sjv2ijAbBG+YZ4TEmfXSGkAxfInwhiBya25T8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=WOE/MXk/cQXHQKgO7kLLt39EramL3IN6zbheDRssRHJm5wRTu02M9wkuhCa75HMzKz XE7xPHEbDDXck49mDs43d9+TZfWs6fzMzUtEcb6kfbYNckHs6Hi9vQ40suuD4zsgttrX d87trOBzqJ5KWKNvcjMMklQVRWUgcUYK35Ljw= Received: by 10.216.154.193 with SMTP id h43mr1689029wek.14.1294280660148; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:20 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.62.75 with SMTP id x53ls9430018wec.3.p; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.239.7 with SMTP id b7mr10309wer.2.1294280659201; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.239.7 with SMTP id b7mr10308wer.2.1294280659186; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ww0-f46.google.com (mail-ww0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id p4si1979286weq.12.2011.01.05.18.24.18; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:18 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of craigbdaniel@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.46; Received: by mail-ww0-f46.google.com with SMTP id 40so17599440wwj.15 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.132.206 with SMTP id c14mr13944996wbt.124.1294280658052; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:24:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.39.73 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 18:24:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9114501.161.1294150198377.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqhy19> <7c0687a1-deba-495a-9760-95d1d0649423@t8g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <20110105165231.GK17534@digitalkingdom.org> <20110105220532.GN17534@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:24:17 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lojban] Re: Vote for the Future Global Language) From: Craig Daniel To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: craigbdaniel@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of craigbdaniel@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.46 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=craigbdaniel@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Ivo Doko wrote: > In any case, this is what I meant: > "It is not true that lojban is fully defined and that lojban is complete and > that lojban is a functioning language." > > That *must* be equivalent to: > "lojban is not fully defined, or lojban is not complete, or lojban is not a > functioning language." No, because "and" binds in two different ways in English when negators get involved. ("Or" behaves similarly, and worse it also gets used for both a logical OR and a logical XOR, with both meanings carrying the same syntactic ambiguity. Natural languages misbehave like that.) It *must* be equivalent to either that or (.onai/aut): "lojban is not fully defined, and lojban is not complete, and lojban is not a functioning language." Which is not the meaning you intended, and not the one I personally got from it, but in context I'm not surprised others read it that way. Moral: Lojban is better at these things. Absent the clarifying mediation of tone of voice (and sometimes even with it), it can be useful to add the missing specificity in English - though it often takes hindsight to realize when, pragmatically speaking, it wasn't filled in by context. (Secondary moral: pragmatics is an important area of study for Lojbanists, even though it's less precisely defined - or definable - than syntax is. English pragmatics do an amazing job of filling in some of the holes left by syntax.) - mi'e .kreig.daniyl. -- 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.