Google in Lojban

[Codalyzer]

Hello.
I'm studying a fascinating language called Lojban. It's a lgical
language developed since 1950s by
academics and scientists. It allows one to express anything in
unambigous way. It could be very exciting and useful to see Google in
this language as there is serious ammount of speakers and students of
it.
Even more, this langage makes human-computer conversations possible. It
can be great for help systems etc. where one would write a question in
Lojban and a help system would return the exact answer to the question,
without having to guess what the user realy wants, by trying to analyze
ambigous natural languages.
Thanks for your attention.

-- .e'osai ko sarji la lojban. Please! Support Lojban.
For more info on Lojban see http://www.lojban.org/

[Inego]

Codalyzer wrote:
> Hello.
> I'm studying a fascinating language called Lojban. It's a logical

> language developed since 1950s by
> academics and scientists. It allows one to express anything in
> unambigous way.

...syntactically unambiguous, I'd like to refine.

> It could be very exciting and useful to see Google in

> this language as there is serious amount of speakers and students of

> it.
> Even more, this langage makes human-computer conversations possible. It
> can be great for help systems etc. where one would write a question in
> Lojban and a help system would return the exact answer to the question,

> without having to guess what the user really wants, by trying to analyze
> ambigous natural languages.

...natural languages are NOT ambiguous. Ambiguity comes not from
natural languages themselves, but from difference in contexts between
speakers. If your sentence about ambiguity of natural languages is in
natural language, then it is ambiguous? ;)

[HOB...@gmail.com]

Inego wrote:
> ...natural languages are NOT ambiguous. Ambiguity comes not from
> natural languages themselves, but from difference in contexts between
> speakers. If your sentence about ambiguity of natural languages is in
> natural language, then it is ambiguous? ;)

You're being overly harsh. Natural languages have the potential to be
syntactically ambiguous ("time flies like an arrow (fruit flies like a
banana)", "pretty little girls' school"), therefore natural languages
are ambiguous in potentia, so in common speak "Natural languages are
ambiguous" is true.

Besides, this is not the place. The proposal is that Google take a
look at the Lojban language. You're _not_ helping.

As to the original point: I would be thrilled to see Google in Lojban.
I vote an enthusiastic 'yes'.

[matthew...@gmail.com]

Here here, put me on the petition as well as the list of people willing
to translate.

[sen]

Agreed. Let's do this thing.

[ScientiaPo...@gmail.com]

My vote is in too. I would absolutely love to get Google involved with
something as great as Lojban.

[ancie...@gmail.com]

Sounds very interesting, maybe we can make something out of it!

Yes.

[Codalyzer]

> > Even more, this langage makes human-computer conversations possible. It
> > can be great for help systems etc. where one would write a question in
> > Lojban and a help system would return the exact answer to the question,
> > without having to guess what the user really wants, by trying to analyze
> > ambigous natural languages.
>
> ...natural languages are NOT ambiguous. Ambiguity comes not from
> natural languages themselves, but from difference in contexts between
> speakers. If your sentence about ambiguity of natural languages is in
> natural language, then it is ambiguous? ;)

If I say to you "Hello" - it's anbigous, but what if I'm trying to say
something more complicated.
How about simple examples:
"The hammer was thrown into the window. It's broken now." - What's
broken? The window, the hammer or something else. That's too much work
for computer. For human who assumes that the hammer have hit the window
AND knows the hammers may break window can tell that it was the window.
Human can cope with it. But...
"Joe met Sonny. He hit him." - I'll pay you if you'll prove it's
unambigous. There is no way a human being can say for sure what
happened here (except that Joe met Sonny).
The problem becomes even worse.
"car go flies" and "cargo flies" sounds the same (with prolly some
deviation in accents).
English is not the only language with ambiguities.
In Russian:
"Убить нельзя, помиловать!" - "Killed it cannot
be, shown mercy!"
"Убить, нельзя помиловать!" - "To kill, it cannot
be shown mercy!"
Same letters, same words. One comma decides the destiny of human life.
As for vernacular Hebrew - it's totaly unintelligible to students of
Hebrew or those highly proficient in biblical language, but not the
vernacular. Expressions turn to meaning you simply have to guess.
People ask each other to clarify what they mean sometimes, or simply
think something the person never meant.
"חבל על הזמן!" - the litteral translation is: "regret about
the time!".
This is one of the most vague hebrew phrases, as it may mean:
Greate Time!
Waste of one's time!
It's nice!
It's cool/wonderful/miraculous/etc.!
Wow, I'm impressed etc.
Good for you!
What a mess!

It may express any strong emotion you speak about and... those I listed
above may have even subtler meanings in different contexts.
There are plenty like that in everyday Hebrew.

The word love is ambigous. It has tons of explainations, including it's
unexplainable etc.
Every culture treats it differently. Just read about it on wikipedia.
There are plenty of words like that. There are words that have meanings
that differ from person to person etc. People that speak the common
language, not always are able to communicate their thoughts.

UN resolutions about Israel and Palestinian Authority is a reason of a
great dispute.
The English version of one of those sais: "Israel will transfer
territories" and French one sais "THE territories". Both sides argue
which is valid. Whether it's all, some or some specific, that some-one
had in mind. We may never know, and we may never prove it, especialy to
any of the sides, especialy if we try to prove they're totaly wrong.

Yes natlangs ARE ambigous. Not all the time, and not in every sentence.
They're not totaly wrong, but just enough to mix things, allow
brainwash, propoganda and mislead people. Careful speaker may subtly
decieve people.
Lojban overcomes some of the above implications by strict syntax,
cultural neutrality, exact meanings of sentances (that may intentionaly
be imprecise if you want it) etc.

[Timo...@gmail.com]

yes, why not? i'd like it. would be very cool:
"i speak lojban"
"lojban? wtf? who even knows that?"
"well, google does"
:)