From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Apr 29 18:32:55 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 30 Apr 2003 01:32:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 85181 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2003 01:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 Apr 2003 01:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2003 01:32:55 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19AgSs-0005PA-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:32:54 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AgSh-0005Ob-00; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:32:43 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net ([212.78.202.113]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AgSO-0005NR-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:32:24 -0700 Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-68-120.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.68.120]) by lmsmtp03.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EFFE3CF01 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 03:31:50 +0200 (MEST) To: Subject: [lojban] Re: nai in UI (was: BPFK phpbb) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 02:31:49 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal X-archive-position: 5028 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "And Rosta" Reply-To: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin If anyone replies to this, I will send any followup to Jboske. Craig: > >A parser that passes nonsense is nonsense > > Like the internal one in your mind? Colorless green ideas sleep furiously? > Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe? Both of > these are nonsense, and yet both are grammatical. The Chomsky ex isn't nonsense -- it is merely surreal & doesn't cohere very straightforwardly with out experience of the world. > So is Lojban's "ko'a kau > nai kau ca kau na kau ka'e kau broda kau". I see no reason why this matters > No simpler alternative to kau being a UI has yet prsented itself I have no problem with the Formal Grammar or Official Parser passing nonsense. But any truly well-formed sentence of Lojban must be meaningful, however silly or surreal that meaning is. A true parser will recognize which strings are and aren't meaningful. A parser that ignores meaning is nonsense, in the sense that it produces nothing useful. --And.