Hacker News Reader

Comment by Deestan | Hacker News Reader

> Why should we not alter our "natural", i.e. legacy based, communication when dealing with computers?

Or when dealing with each other, for that matter. In Lojban, it is grammatically incorrect for someone to give me vague directions like "we are at the pub to the left of the central plaza". They would instead have to say something like "we-not-you are now at the only pub to the left (when seen from the cinema) of the only plaza".

Imagine political debates where imprecise language and double meaning are much harder to express. Mmm...

.i mi batci le mlatu

View on HN

> of the only plaza

Which plaza? Just because you said "the only plaza" doesn't make it unambiguous. There certainly exist more than one plaza in any given city.

"The only plaza" is either unambiguous (in cities with one plaza) or incorrect (in cities with multiple plazas). Just because a language makes it impossible to be unambiguous doesn't mean it makes it impossible to be wrong.

perhaps, you might say 'the assumed plaza' for explicit-ambiguity?

Ah, yes. That is actually what the Lojban sentence would have said. My "translation" of that part was a bit off.

> Just because you said "the only plaza" doesn't make it unambiguous.

That was just me compressing it to fit somewhat into English. What it really would say is "the only plaza which fits the current context", as opposed to e.g. "the specific place called The Plaza" or "the only plaza in the universe".

The specific Plaza change wasn't the intended point, though. The "to the left of X while standing at Y" as opposed to "to the left of X" is the biggest clarity gain.

It is obviously possible to express ambiguity in any language, even Lojban, but you have to work harder for it.

How exactly is that any different from "the plaza"?

What's even "the current context"?

Again, the "plaza" part of the sentence is not relevant to the actual point I was making. I did not claim that specific change gave a huge boost in clarity.

> How exactly is that any different from "the plaza"?

It is different in that the ambiguity is explicit.

> What's even "the current context"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Context : "Context is the surroundings, circumstances, environment, background, or settings which determine, specify, or clarify the meaning of an event." Example context: Me and the person who gives me directions commonly use that specific plaza as a reference point. Another possible context: Directions are related to my small town, which only has one proper plaza.

We understand these things, but they are technically ambiguous, saying "the-only-plaza" doesn't remove any ambiguitiy. "The current context" is also implied, stating it explicitly doesn't add anything, what so ever.

Actually, referring explicitly to the current context would probably just cause confusion, it implies that we both agree on the exact meaning/content of the "current context", which is often not exactly the case.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com