You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

kithpendragon comments on The value of ambiguous speech - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: KevinGrant 30 November 2015 07:58AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (37)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: kithpendragon 30 November 2015 01:11:33PM 4 points [-]

I happen to be studying lojban at the moment, and I think the designers have defined linguistic ambiguity not as the opposite of specificity (one of the first lojban words I learned was "zo'e" /ZO.he/, which means something like "contains contextually sensitive information that makes this utterance true, the exact value of which is irrelevant or obvious"), but rather as a linguistic property whereby a semantic construct cannot be pinned down to communicating a specific value. The classic English language example is "time flies like a banana", in which any of the first three words can be the verb.

Comment author: malcolmocean 05 December 2015 10:21:49PM 5 points [-]

Whoa, it never occurred to me that time could be the verb there.