--On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 1:01 PM, 'John E Clifford' via lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com> wrote:Both attitudinals and vocatives (and Gricean operators and evidentials and just about anything else I can think of) have places in the extended logics that comprise appropriate bases, so those are not problems.If those extended logics use the same formalism of FOPL, then their formulas can be directly and automatically translated into Lojban (but without using Lojban's "shortcuts", of course). If they each use a different particular syntax, then they may not have an automatic translation into Lojban, or at least each case would have to be analysed separately to see how it can be accommodated. I don't think it's reasonable to expect Lojban to automatically translate every formalism ever used though.It is pretty easy -- in theory. Working out the practical details is the bitch. But I suspect the real reason it has not been done is that no one has until recently been very explicit about what needs to be done, the whole having been expressed in vague generalities rather than (slightly) more specific programs. Score a point or two for the radical revisionists.A lot of work needs to be done to explain how Lojban's "shortcuts", and its "bells and whistles", translate into something that can be called "logical". If that's what you're saying, I agree. What I thought you were saying, but perhaps you were not, is that you had doubts that Lojban would have any trouble expressing FOPL. That part is trivial.mu'o mi'e xorxesYou received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/f9L_hAbBcwc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.