From pycyn@aol.com Wed Apr 10 14:23:38 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 10 Apr 2002 21:23:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 57740 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2002 21:21:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Apr 2002 21:21:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m05.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.8) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2002 21:21:05 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id 9.143.ca77749 (16336) for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:17:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <143.ca77749.29e605cb@aol.com> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:16:59 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] ce'u once again To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_143.ca77749.29e605cb_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_143.ca77749.29e605cb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/10/2002 3:35:12 PM Central Daylight Time, araizen@newmail.net writes: > Well, I'm not sure that this is the type of logic that's at the heart > of a Logical Language, it's more like simplicity and analogousness. At > any rate, Lojban is hardly a perfect loglan, the addition of this > feature will have to wait for the next generation. > It is, of course, exactly the type of logic that is behind loglans: the grammar of the language is meant to be patterned on that of First Order Predicate Logic (Principia Mathematica or so). The rest of the "logical" part is later additions and vain and misguided hopes (and not related to Sapir-Whorf neither, since that is about grammar). Sadly plausible, alas. Not obvious, since it doesn't happen now and the change is insignificant (indeed, non-existent, so far as I can see -- well, if you allow delayed connections to LE, ...). Notice that I would expect some visible differences between sumti in a sumti bridi and those in a sentential or predicate bridi -- in this case not dropping the fundamental hooks, {be/bei} (it turns out that the selbri in a sumti has to be a degenerate tanru to get these things in! hysteron proteron). --part1_143.ca77749.29e605cb_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/10/2002 3:35:12 PM Central Daylight Time, araizen@newmail.net writes:


Well, I'm not sure that this is the type of logic that's at the heart
of a Logical Language, it's more like simplicity and analogousness. At
any rate, Lojban is hardly a perfect loglan, the addition of this
feature will have to wait for the next generation.


It is, of course, exactly the type of logic that is behind loglans: the grammar of the language is meant to be patterned on that of First Order Predicate Logic (Principia Mathematica or so).  The rest of the "logical" part is later additions and vain and misguided hopes (and not related to Sapir-Whorf neither, since that is about grammar).

<Probably analogy to English grammar and lack of thoughly thinking it
through.>

Sadly plausible, alas.

<There are other problems; if 'le' is followed by a bridi, then the
sumti would almost always need an explicit terminator, to avoid
swallowing the next sumti, but it might be possible to work something
out.>

Not obvious, since it doesn't happen now and the change is insignificant (indeed, non-existent, so far as I can see -- well, if you allow delayed connections to LE, ...).  Notice that I would expect some visible differences between sumti in a sumti bridi and those in a sentential or predicate bridi -- in this case not dropping the fundamental hooks, {be/bei} (it turns out that the selbri in a sumti has to be a degenerate tanru to get these things in! hysteron proteron).



 --part1_143.ca77749.29e605cb_boundary--