[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Revising mu'ei and CAhA once again. Possible worlds.
Gleki Arxokuna, On 14/08/2012 18:23:
I wish Robin started using {mu'ei} again but
it's really when usage decides. May be human brain just doesn't want
to deal with A-level at such level of precision. May be {ka'e/na
ka'e/ka'ei/bia'i} or even {bi'ai} is enough.
The evidence of natural language is to the contrary. The could/probably/would contrast is the some/most/all contrast.
The use of {da'i} is interesting. For a logical language it's
completely deplorable, because there's a complete mismatch between
the lexicosyntactic form and the logical form, and no explicit rule
about how to get from one to the other -- it works by mere stipulated
magic. But it caught on among those impatient to be actively using
the language, and nicely illustrated the fundamental incompatibility
between a loglang and a language governed by the principle of "let
usage decide".
May be we can determine the most common usage of {da'i} and redefine
it from the point of view of A/M/F-level scheme? May be we should
perform analysis of Lojban corpus and tatoeba sentences?
{da'i} is in UI, isn't it? So it doesn't have the right grammatical properties.
The purest ways to proceed would be either (1) to define things so that they're logical and regular, regardless of usage, i.e. basically just implement all xorxes's proposals, or (2) to treat the language as an inchoate natlang, a la Lojbab, and abduce grammar out of usage as linguistics of natlangs does.
--And.
--
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.