BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo

Prior usage and discussion



Seems to be used mostly parallel to paragraph breaks in natural languages. See link), link), and link). On IRC, which is indicative of spoken language, this appears to have more of a meaning of changing the subject. Examples: link), link).

ni'o implicitly cancels some assignments, depending on the number of consecutive ni'o and whether the text is spoken or written. The following table is due to CLL pp. 446--447.

Number of consecutive ni'oWrittenSpoken
ni'ono effectcancel KOhA and GOhA
ni'oni'ocancel KOhA and GOhAcancel KOhA and GOhA and tenses
ni'oni'oni'ocancel KOhA and GOhA and tensescancel KOhA and GOhA and tenses


Examples of ni'o Usage

A: ni'o mi ca'o kelci lo samselkei
B: .i .ua go'i lo samselkei no'u ma
A: .i go'i la'o gy. Final Fantasy .gy.
B: .i .io mi nelci
A: ni'o mi djica lo nu citka
B: no'i mi djica lo nu jbera fi do
A: .i je'e


I did not include a natural example because the usage is wide, varied, and mostly incorrect between spoken, e-mailed, IRC'd, and written Lojban. It should be used for starting new topics of discussion, which as a by-product also clears KOhA and GOhA as well as sticky tenses (IIRC). It is not a paragraph marker (whitespace can be used for that and nobody said how much whitespace is allowed), it is a topic marker.



Proposed dictionary entries











Interaction with other sections

  • The wording of the definition of "fa'o" must be watched closely to prevent contradictions with BPFK Section: Nonce connectives.
  • The selma'o MAI probably requires either preprocessing prior to YACC, or a PEG grammar.



TUhU is currently seldom elidable. I believe that currently it is only elidable at the end of text. It is the belief of .xorxes., me, and possibly others that it should never be elidable. - .aionys.

NIhO should *NOT* have different uffects depending on the medium it is in. rlpowell agrees. (I don't like how "ni'o"*N resets various things depending on N. Can't tense be reset using KI?) - .djeims./purpleposeidon/neptunepink (+1 check out my notes by the applicable words. -Lindar)


It is my belief that this section does not invalidate actual usages that were previously valid, nor does it contradict current prescription of the language.

  • Clarification: topic resumption by label applies if no'i has a positive or zero subscript.
  • Clarification: topic resumption by back-counting starts at section before the one currently being introduced.
  • Clarification: the implication that any term in a prenex is either a bound variable or a topic (CLL p. 467) is made explicit.


Created by arj. Last Modification: Sunday 24 of August, 2014 22:24:17 GMT by Ilmen.