Tanru aren't ambiguous; they're merely vague. When instances of genuine ambiguity have been found, there's been consensus among the logical language lojbanists (as opposed to Usage Decides lojbanists) that there needs to be an interpretation rule that gets rid of it.
On 27 Sep 2011 18:46, "John E. Clifford" <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:--
Remember that Lojban claims to be ambiguity- free in only two respects: every Lojban utterance can be uniquely decomposed into words, whose syntactic type is fixed, and every sentence that passes the official grammar has only one parse tree. This not a trivial claim, since most languages, including much simpler conlangs, do not have either of these properties. But when we move on to semantics, this is not enough to guarantee unique readings. Lojban is clear on transformation involving conjunction relations between two or more sentences with common elements, but not so much on deep structure below the sentence level. In particular, tanru are opaque, ambiguous, though other, less common, structure are as well.
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:20, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
> Escape Landsome, On 27/09/2011...> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
> ...