[lojban] Re: Semantic Representation of Lojban

[Jonathan Strickland <djanatyn@gmail.com>]

I'd really be interesting in coming this year, if it was possible to
grab plane tickets from somebody. With my current circumstances, I
would have a higher chance of coming if jbonunsla was at a public
convention, but I can see the benefits of having it in the home of a
lojbanist as well. I attended jbonunsla last year in April, and while
I very much enjoyed hanging out with other lojbanists, it wasn't as
concentrated as it could have been. I think a lot of people enjoyed
spending time going off and enjoying the other aspects of the
convention (including myself), but having it in the home of lojbanist
would probably make it more...lojban-ical.

With that being said, *personally*, I would enjoy having it at a
convention. We did some interesting lojbanic things last year, and I'm
sure if we had it at a convention then the lojban games and fun would
continue. But...that's just my personal opinion. I like conventions,
anyway, and all-lojban all-the-time would be a tad too intensive for a
beginner like me.

On Jan 6, 5:35 pm, ".alyn.post." <alyn.p...@lodockikumazvati.org>
wrote:
> I'd like to ellaborate a little more on this, because the link I
> provided has a low information content.  I need to solve problems
> like this:
>
> Nonviolent Communication[1] has a four-part communication model
> called OFNR[2].  In it, you state your observation, your feeling,
> your need, and (optionally) a request.
>
> This turns out to be difficult, because we constantly mix
> observations and feelings, state judgements as if they were
> feelings, &c.  It is something that takes practice to do well.
>
> I want to be able to classify a Lojban statement based on a
> constraint, like this:
>
>   Does statement X consist of an observation, then a feeling, then
>   a need, and then optionally a request.
>
> The idea being that one can type in what *seems* like an OFNR
> statement, and have the computer call you on it if it isn't.
>
> The above is actually quite complex, compared to the first version
> of what I want to do, which is to have a conversation with ~20 valsi
> and a finite state machine with something like that many states, and
> use a simple version of the above classifier as to control state
> transition.  The classifier won't need to handle anything outside
> the scope of those ~20 valsi, save to transition to a "maybe you
> ought to write that piece you clever monkey" state.
>
> I hope that demonstrates that I don't need a formal solution to the
> problem, but that I need something *like* a solution to the problem,
> and I hope that gives a better idea of the kind of thing I have in
> mind, as I'm working on and interested in this topic.
>
> -Alan
>
> 1:http://www.cnvc.org/
> 2:http://en.nvcwiki.com/index.php/Four_part_model
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:11:07PM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote:
> > 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.p...@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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi
>
> --
> .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.