Re: BPFK Section: lerfu Forming cmavo
> Anonymous:
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
>
> > > 1. In the section on how "bu" combines (or not), it's missing that
> > > it doesn't combine with "bu". In fact, the parser spits out "ky
> > > bu bu" as an error. But The Book says (page 416): 'It is also
> > > illegal to attach "bu" to itself, but more than one "bu" may
> > > attach to a word". This is a disagreement that needs to be
> > > addressed.
> >
> > I would be willing to bet that that's supposed to be "but *no* more
> > than". Otherwise it would be rather strange English (as written,
> > that should be an 'and' and not a 'but').
>
> No, I meant what I wrote: it means that while "bu bu" can happen in Lojban,
> this is not an instance of "bu" applying to "bu", but rather of "bu" applying
> to "X bu" where X is the preceding word.
Is this supposed to be recursive? IOW, is "mi do bu bu" supposed to work out as "(mi (do bu) bu)"?
-Robin