title_body: Does Lojban completely remove semantic ambiguity? As a constructed, syntactically unambiguous language (Wikipedia), does Lojban also completely eliminate semantic ambiguity? If not, what are some examples?
upvoted_answer: Let's take an element of Lojban's grammar, and see if it's semantically ambiguous.
  In lojban, tanru are basically two predicates in adposition. The first one semantically modifies the second one; and that's all.  
  
  Example:
  
  
  {lo zdani gerku cu barda}: The house dog is big.
  {lo gerku zdani cu barda}: The kennel is big.
  
  
  Where {zdani} (roughly) means "home", {gerku} means "dog", and {barda} means "big (the rest is grammatical witchcraft, don't bother).
  
  In the first example, {zdani gerku} is syntactically a tanru, and {zdani} modifies {gerku}. However, the tanru is primarily about {gerku}.
  In the second one, it's the reverse. {gerku zdani} is also syntactically a tanru, but {gerku} modifies {zdani}; and the overall tanru is about {zadni}, not {gerku}.
  
  However, it isn't possible to make assumptions about the overall meaning of a tanru. Though it's syntactically not ambiguous, it is semantically ambiguous.
  I've chosen the english “house dog” and “kennel”, but it was just my intent, and english translates this way. Officially, it's not possible to infer the meaning from a tanru.
  
  You can even read yourself in the last official reference grammar that “All tanru are ambiguous semantically.”
  
  For a surer version:
  
  
  {lo gerku poi ta'e zvati lo zdani cu barda}: The dog that uses to live at the house is big
  {lo zdani poi zukte ke'a lo nu stuzi lo gerku cu barda}: The house that is aimed so that dogs could live in is big.
  
  
  EDIT: added an explanation on how it's ambiguous, and the surer examples.