[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Semantic Representation of Lojban



By "playing with it," I mean specifically that I have an application
in mind[1] and will be doing the minimum amount of work in this
domain to support that application, with my goal being to develop
and deliver the application, rather than a formal solution to this
problem.

The initial version of the application requires only a pathetically
bad approximation to this problem, and so I will be able to use the
result in well under a few thousand man-hours.

-Alan

1: http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/kiksispehi

On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 02:01:56PM -0800, John E Clifford wrote:
> As a practical matter, the first (and officially easiest -- but time will tell) 
> part would be to devise the rules for working back from Lojban surface 
> structures to the underlying predicate logic ones: all logical connectives 
> between sentences, all quantifiers and negations in appropriate prenex position 
> (so the structure that immediate follows -- a sentence of some sort -- will be 
> exactly the intended scope).  You might also start a bunch of meaning 
> postulates, that relate one concept to others (I suppose, at least initially. 
> that the metalanguage will be English) and throw in the laws of logic just in 
> case (but they are probably going to be needed early on anyhow, to sort out 
> issues in prenectification).  That ought to be worth a few thousand man-hours.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: .alyn.post. <alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org>
> To: lojban@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thu, January 6, 2011 2:45:34 PM
> Subject: [lojban] Semantic Representation of Lojban
> 
> [I've moved this to it's own thread for higher visibility of the
> topic.]
> 
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:38:23PM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > Well, to a certain extent you're right, but if you choose the
> > > right kind of semantic representation, you can do things like
> > > proving that two different strings of Lojban have the same
> > > meaning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but at the moment no machine
> > > grammar of Lojban represents the fact that “mi viska do” is
> > > equivalent to “do se viska mi”.
> > 
> > Right, very true.  People have started playing with that.
> > 
> 
> I've started playing with it, certainly.  Enough to where I'm
> considering flying out to Penguicon to brainstorm and talk about
> it with other Lojbanists.
> 
> If others of you are working on it and are able and interested in
> meeting about it, will you speak up?
> 
> -Alan
> -- 
> .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi
> 
> -- 
> 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.
> 

-- 
.i ko djuno fi le do sevzi

-- 
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.