Re: [lojban] Re: Are Natlang the best case for entropy in communication ?

[Escape Landsome <escaaape@gmail.com>]

> Well, a lot of "words" in Chinese are phonologically identical, but the problem is solved by not using a given word in isolation but rather embedded in a cloud of distinctive other words.  When a Chinese speaks of shrimp, for example, the expression he uses translates as something like "shrimp shrimp [a different word] fish bug" (from memory, details may vary, though not the principle).

True, that is, with redundancy the code can convey information more
securely...   This is well known in information theory.

Please, consider the notion of paradigm.  A paradigm is a set of
options or choices you can choose one within the set.   If there is
ambiguity between two words that are not in the same paradigm, this is
not as annoying as if the ambiguit lies between two words of the same
paradigm, not even mentioning the case of two opposite words !

For instance, in english, you could confound "none" and "nun", or
"all" and "owl", but at least there's no chance to confound "all" and
"none", AND THAT IS THE IMPORTANT THING !

-- 
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.