[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: [lojban] Tangent: Is there a better grammar?
Agreed, guaspi doesn't really differentiate from the predicate logic foundation (if there is a "better" foundation out there, then I have yet to hear of it..not to say it doesn't exist).
I was under the impression that lojban was longer than english (and most natural languages) syllable-for-syllable, since so many things need to be expressed in lojban which are usually left to context in english (terminators, etc.)... It's true there are some lojban constructions which are don't translate easily into english, but I'm pretty sure I read somewhere "That's one of the problems with lojban; it takes a lot of syllables to express yourself"... If this were true, then the argument is that the extra syllables given by the tonal system allow you to make one-syllable words which stand for two-or-more syllable words, similar to {lei} = {lu'o le}.
Of course, I could be wrong. Does anyone know if lojban texts have statistically more/less syllables than their english/natural language equivalents? I suppose to be truly fair, those stats might need to include texts composed in lojban and then translated into english as well...
-Geoff
On Apr 7, 2010 7:47am, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm mistaken, but guaspi appears to have a comparable vocabulary size, and merely replaces sumti markup with a tonally-modified cases; that is, it doesn't seem to radically deviate from lojban's predicate logic foundation, nor make great gains in brevity/simplicity-- the author claims length is "comparable to english" where I always thought that lojban was briefer than English.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 13:28, Robin Lee Powell rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.math.ucla.edu/~jimc/guaspi/
>
>
>
> -Robin
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 01:30:15AM +0000, GFBeresford@gmail.com
>
> wrote:
>
>
> > 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 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 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.
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> They say: "The first AIs will be built by the military as weapons."
>
> And I'm thinking: "Does it even occur to you to try for something
>
> other than the default outcome?" See http://shrunklink.com/cdiz
>
> http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> 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.
>
--
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.