On 8/3/2020 2:59 PM, scope845hlang343jbo@icebubble.org wrote:
scope845hlang343jbo@icebubble.org writes:Does anybody have access to a proof, or know how to prove, that Lojban's morphology is unambiguous? I was corresponding with lojbab, for a while, about this and he assured me that the unambiguity of Lojban's morphology had been proven analytically. But when I asked him for his analytical methods/proof, he stopped responding to me. :( Does anybody know where this information can be found? It would be much appreciated.Is it taboo to question the non-ambiguity of the Lojban morphology? I can't seem to get a straight answer from anyone about this.
It is not taboo, but there isn't a lot of interest in the issue, and I don't have time to do the digging you require, and I am not sure that there was even a final writeup. Most of the people who were interested in the past are inactive at this point.
This was a question that largely was satisfied over 25 years ago. We satisfied ourselves to a level that met our needs at the time, and no one has come up with counterexamples. The few problem areas, if they can be called such, had to do with possible extensions to the language, none of which are even being used to my knowledge.
I do recall that at one time we attempted to write a software exhaustive test something like what was suggested by Mr Errington, but we decided that the number of possible cases was far too large and hence non-computable, given the PC hardware then available, and went to a more logico-analytical approach. But any notes that I might have kept are rather deeply buried in my archived files.
lojbab -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/66e54805-2c96-f078-a7b2-c1fdce8216a8%40lojban.org.