Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

204123Re: minimalist loglangs (was: Re: Universal language for communicating with space aliens

Expand Messages
  • Gleki Arxokuna
    Jul 25, 2014
    • 0 Attachment
      2014-07-25 17:17 GMT+04:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@...>:

      > Alex Fink, On 24/07/2014 15:20:
      >> But also, how much of the messiness of Lojban should be regarded as
      >> concessions to usability, that e.g. Xorban might also pick up if its
      >> history and community were comparable?
      > Almost none. The only thing that comes to mind is
      > (i) afterthought connectives
      > (ii) the decision to model Loglan/Lojban syntax on natural language rather
      > than on predicate logic (-- e.g. its articles and article phrases; its
      > default positioning of quantifiers)
      > Gleki Arxokuna, On 24/07/2014 15:28:>>
      >> Some has already been said about extant conlangs of this form, but be
      >>> aware that they come much much much cleaner and more minimalist than
      >>> Lojban! Look for instance into Xorban, or 2D Livagian.
      >> I'd love to. But no one managed to write a concise grammar of xorban.
      > Xorban is a fragmentarily-documented sketch; but mostly, all the stuff
      > Lojban does document, Xorban has discarded. The stuff that remains in
      > Xorban is even less well-documented in Lojban -- I mean here the mapping
      > from visible form to logical form -- and from what documentation there is,
      > I think it's easier to work out how Xorban works than how Lojban does.

      Not for me since its grammar is split among zillions of files on the
      mailing list which im not going to read. I'd love to read the final version
      of its grammar.

      > As for Livagian the reply was there is nowhere to read its full grammar.
      > By "2D Livagian", Alex just means a 2D notation for predicate logic (which
      > I devised and attributed to the Livagians). It has these characteristics:
      > 1. Symbols are laid out on a grid.
      > 2. Each symbol represents an argument-place of a predicate (e.g. 'Lover',
      > 'Lovee')
      > 3. Symbols on the same column are argument-places of the same predicate.
      > 4. Symbols on the same row are argument-places (of different predicates)
      > with the same value.
      > 5. All predicates have (davidsonian) event arguments.
      > 6. Each predicate type ('Love', 'Hate', 'Cat' etc.) consists of a unique
      > set of argument-place symbols.
      > This is the minimalest notation for predicate logic I know of. Alas -- for
      > loglangs -- it is two dimensional. The extent to which it can be coverted
      > into linear form without augmenting the symbols is a matter on which Alex
      > has been working (as I gaze on with awe and the occasional slight glimmer
      > of a glimmer of understanding).

      Where can i read the grammar of at least working examples of this language?
    • Show all 118 messages in this topic