3 ms·
Let's use a non-ambiguous language for this. May I suggest Lojban [1][2]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban [2] So
by nomel 7mo ago
Let's use a non-ambiguous language for this. May I suggest Lojban [1][2]?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban
[2] Someone speaking it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxQjwbUiM9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxQjwbUiM9w
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- dooglius 7mo agoIt looks like that's about syntactic ambiguity, whereas the parent is talking semantic ambiguity
- mike_hearn 7mo agoLojban allows you to speak ambiguously, it just disallows grammatical ambiguity because in the 70s it was hypothesized that NLP understanding was impossible so humans would have to adapt instead of computers. That debate is over; understanding grammar is solved. The new debate is over semantic ambiguity.
- dwb 7mo agoLojban allows you to be vastly more semantically ambiguous than English while still speaking technically correctly. A single predicate-word (“gismu”) is a valid utterance. For example, saying “tanxe” is so vague or context-dependent enough as to be hard to translate: “something unspecified is a box, at an unspecified time or place, and it may or may not even exist”. Language will not save you. Or if it will, we already have them in the form of programming languages.