From ragnarok@pobox.com Mon May 05 17:34:48 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 13843 invoked from network); 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPw-0003R4-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:48 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPo-0003Qi-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:40 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPe-0003QW-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:30 -0700 Received: from craig [209.42.200.60] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A2F5D9F023C; Mon, 05 May 2003 20:33:57 -0400 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: semantic space Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 20:34:06 -0400 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) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3EB7630B.1090901@bilkent.edu.tr> X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.60] X-archive-position: 5143 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Craig" Reply-To: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >>>>>>>>>Lojban doesn't really classify relations at all: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>the gismu list is a large and disorderly bag whose merit is that it >>>>>>>>blankets semantic space, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>has this really been demonstrated? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>How does one demonstrate that? (Or, for starters, measure semantic >>>> >>>>space?) >>>> >>>> >>>>>I would have thought one thing Lojban does very well is classifying >>>>>relations. "Semantic space" is just a (sometimes) convenient metaphor. >>>>>There is no real space out there to be carved up into concepts. >>>> >>>> >>>>Well, in a sense there is. If we only had thirty-five gismu (the lowest >>>>minimum I've heard claimed as necessary) then we would need them all to >>>>encompass a great deal of stuff. >> >> >>>No, we could just pick thirty-five things that we thought were worth >>>talking about. >> >> >> Seeing as the thirty-five figure is claimed for a natural language, which >> can talk about everything... >Why should a natural language be able to talk about everything? Can you >talk about astrophysics in Hittite? Hittite, an extinct language, has never had speakers who could discuss astrophysics in *any* language. But I defy you to list thirty-five things that aren't so vague as to make the claim meaningless such that I can't come up with a number thirty-six that you'd probably be able to discuss in Nahuatl. From ragnarok@pobox.com Mon May 05 17:34:48 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_6); 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 13843 invoked from network); 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 May 2003 00:34:48 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPw-0003R4-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:48 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPo-0003Qi-00; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:40 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19CqPe-0003QW-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 05 May 2003 17:34:30 -0700 Received: from craig [209.42.200.60] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A2F5D9F023C; Mon, 05 May 2003 20:33:57 -0400 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: semantic space Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 20:34:06 -0400 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) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3EB7630B.1090901@bilkent.edu.tr> X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.60] X-archive-position: 5143 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Craig" Reply-To: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >>>>>>>>>Lojban doesn't really classify relations at all: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>the gismu list is a large and disorderly bag whose merit is that it >>>>>>>>blankets semantic space, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>has this really been demonstrated? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>How does one demonstrate that? (Or, for starters, measure semantic >>>> >>>>space?) >>>> >>>> >>>>>I would have thought one thing Lojban does very well is classifying >>>>>relations. "Semantic space" is just a (sometimes) convenient metaphor. >>>>>There is no real space out there to be carved up into concepts. >>>> >>>> >>>>Well, in a sense there is. If we only had thirty-five gismu (the lowest >>>>minimum I've heard claimed as necessary) then we would need them all to >>>>encompass a great deal of stuff. >> >> >>>No, we could just pick thirty-five things that we thought were worth >>>talking about. >> >> >> Seeing as the thirty-five figure is claimed for a natural language, which >> can talk about everything... >Why should a natural language be able to talk about everything? Can you >talk about astrophysics in Hittite? Hittite, an extinct language, has never had speakers who could discuss astrophysics in *any* language. But I defy you to list thirty-five things that aren't so vague as to make the claim meaningless such that I can't come up with a number thirty-six that you'd probably be able to discuss in Nahuatl.