Re: [lojban] semantic parser - tersmu-0.1rc1

[Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>]

2011/12/1 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:

> I'm not seeing any solutions other than either (a) choosing one of (i)
> and (ii), and declaring the other disallowed; (b) just accepting this as
> an ugly exception to the wide "scope" of description sumti.
>
> I don't like either of these.
>
> Any better ideas?

Define better where the quantifier that binds a variable implicitly
goes. Is "da" just equivalent to "su'o da" in the same position where
it first occurs (in which case the scope of "su'o" is determined by
this position only) or is "da" bound by a quantifier with scope wide
enough to encompass all following occurrences of "da" (in which case
it may not be equivalent to "su'o da" in the same position)? The two
criteria give the same results for very simple cases, but different
results for slightly more complicated ones. I don't think anyone ever
bothered to define a proper rule for this.

 

  My personal opinion is that, in the absence of an explicit prenex, "da" should probably be considered "su'oda" and the scope of that definition of da is all physcially following  bridi in that sentence that are on the same level or below (including bridi tails, if it was used in the main bridi), and (if used in the main bridi) all subsequent sentences that are linked by an .i{X}bo.... but I am probably wrong.

              --gejyspa

 

-- 
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.