Logic to Lojban. Poorly put. Yes, we can always actually speak a formula in Lojban. The trick is get a scheme whereby any Lojban sentence can be shown to be derived from a formula without loss of meaning. If Lojban really does contain non-logical elements (I'm not sure what that means, but ...) then the claim falls apart. If the shortcuts are not rule governed, then the claim falls apart. So the hope is that both of those suggestions are false and that the two projects proposed here are in fact two sides of the same coin. Since the formula to language move is just (theoretically) standard linguistics, it ought to be relatively easy and then the trip back be pretty straightforward (by forcing if nothing else). The suspicion that underlies
most recommendations to change Lojban or replace it is that, in the fairly blind attempt to achieve monoparsing without a suitable grammar, many complications were inserted that actually interfere with the desired result, rather than just being unduly (it seems from the outside) complex ways of getting there.
On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 9:25 AM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote: