[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Re: mi kakne lo bajra
.i je'u ro bruna cu nanmu
.i pe'i ro nanmu cu ba'e ka'e bruna
I may have overused implicit {ka'e}, in the name of getting funny results.
Probably all of this needs to go onto a wiki page somewhere.
On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
> .i do cusku lu ro da nanmu gi'o bruna li'u .i ku'i mi nanmu gi'enai bruna .i
> pe'i ro da nanmu gi'anai bruna .i simsa
>
> mu'o mi'e latros.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Adam Lopresto <adamlopresto@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I worked on something similar to this some time ago. But I quickly
>> realized that we have a language that is very, very good at expressing
>> this sort of relationship: lojban.
>>
>> With that in mind, refer you to mlismu, a random bridi generator.
>> Specifically, it parses a data file written in lojban that contains
>> relationships of the sort you're describing, and produces bridi that
>> match the right types.
>>
>> Your "must-be" and "can-act-as" are actually flip sides of the same
>> coin. So instead of "x1 must-be agent", I'd say something like
>> .i ro bajra ka'e gasnu
>> (Or equivalently, the set of runners is a subset of the set of agents).
>>
>> Take a look at it, particularly the fatci.txt. It's not thorough at
>> all, and there are some things I put in there that are known to be
>> false, but produced humorous results (since the whole thing started as
>> a joke). Hopefully, I've marked those with {je'u nai} or {zo'o}, but
>> some may have escaped.
>>
>> http://students.cec.wustl.edu/~adam/lojban/mlismu/
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Re: "Again, the important thing is which individual places accept
>> > what sorts
>> > of arguments. The gismu itself just relates those places."
>> >
>> > So then, the concept of my spreadsheet *DOES* contain useful and valid
>> > information, but would only be complete if it were expanded to include
>> > all
>> > the 'oblique' sumti places as well?
>> >
>> > Re:"Does it bother you that *{mi pinxe lo jubme} would also be
>> > considered
>> > semantic nonsense, because tables aren't the sort of thing that one can
>> > drink?"
>> >
>> > If things like "agent/object" are specified in these definitions, why
>> > shouldn't all 'sensical' general classes like material states
>> > ("liquid/solid") be included as well? This is in part why I was
>> > referring to
>> > these 'classifiers' as 'tags' originally. As long as people can easily
>> > point
>> > to a construction and say "according to this sumti's implied class and
>> > that
>> > selbri's meaning, this makes no sense," I think that type of judgement
>> > should have a clear litmus test. And there's nothing stopping us. With a
>> > vocabulary of less than 1500 words, many of which fall into regular
>> > sub-classes in the thesaurus, I see no reason why we shouldn't have this
>> > resource.
>> >
>> > So, to expand the scope here, I'm proposing that each and every sumti
>> > position in gismu definitions list explicit tags for baseline
>> > sensicality.
>> > That is, for bajra:
>> >
>> > bajra: x1 runs on surface x2 using limbs x3 with gait x4
>> >
>> > Now account for baseline sensicality:
>> >
>> > x1 must-be agent...
>> > x2 must-be material...
>> > x3 must-be material, must-be movable-part...
>> > x4 must-be manner...
>> >
>> > Now let's envision that these clearly specified 'baseline sensicality
>> > tags'
>> > for sumti positions are like 'keyhole definitions' that only these
>> > explicit
>> > classes can fit. Now, each sumti position also gets any number of 'key
>> > definitions' for what it can fit into, or what sumti places it can
>> > sensically 'fill.'
>> >
>> > x1 can-act-as agent, can-act-as moving-thing, can-act-as athlete...
>> > x2 can-act-as general-place, can-act-as surface...
>> > x3 can-act-as body-part...
>> > x4 can-act-as idea...
>> >
>> > Now, if we do this for every gismu, I imagine we'd end up with many
>> > high-frequency tags like "agent" and "material," and several hundred
>> > less
>> > frequent tags like "liquid" "body-part." Each of these tags would have a
>> > list of sumti positions it requires, and a (probably much larger) list
>> > of
>> > sumti positions that can "sensically" fit that semantic role.
>> > This data/document would not only provide a richer (many-to-many) series
>> > of
>> > 'categories' for vocabulary study lists, there are a series of new
>> > applications this would allow. You could automatically gauge the degree
>> > of
>> > 'figurative language' used in a text. You could automatically generate
>> > sensical example sentences for given vocabulary (or even generate
>> > a minimal
>> > spanning sensible sentence for a set of words). You could even develop
>> > a
>> > kind of auto-complete function for a lojban-specific text-editor: as you
>> > begin to type a sumti in, a list of 'sensical' suggestions could come up
>> > in
>> > a tooltip window. If we get this data, I'd totally code that!
>> >
>> > But I want to make sure I'm understanding the nature of this data set.
>> > Please let me know if I'm still making sense, and if I do, I'll come up
>> > with
>> > technical specs for a web interface to make this data easy to gather and
>> > manage. Maybe I'll use this as a way to learn to use github.
>> >
>> > co'o mi'e korbi
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:14, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Well, xorxes has ideas about how Lojban *does* work, and, with minor
>> >> exceptions,
>> >> he has got it right. So Lojban is his "other" language. Sorry you
>> >> think
>> >> this
>> >> discussion is bull-crap; it is trying to work out the ramifications of
>> >> Lojvan
>> >> being a logical language, dealing with both the logical part and the
>> >> language
>> >> part, and shooting for reasonable resolution where they appear to
>> >> conflict.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message ----
>> >> From: Lindar <lindarthebard@yahoo.com>
>> >> To: lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com>
>> >> Sent: Tue, November 2, 2010 9:55:04 AM
>> >> Subject: [lojban] Re: mi kakne lo bajra
>> >>
>> >> Oren, I answered your question some two or three times.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Where x2 of broda asks for {nu} and x1 of brode asks for {nu}, {.i
>> >> broda lo brode} is kosher, because lo brode already -is- an event. For
>> >> all other cases, an abstractor is necessary.
>> >>
>> >> (barring all the other bullcrap/arguments going on right now)
>> >>
>> >> xorxes, since you have all these ideas about how Lojban should work,
>> >> why don't you just make your -own- language and let it stand up to
>> >> Lojban?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> 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.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Oren Robinson
>> > (315) 569-2888
>> > 102 Morrison Ave
>> > Somerville, MA 02144
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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.
>
--
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.