Lojban In General

Lojban In General


tagged termsets

posts: 350

Totus asked about the following at the end of Esther chapter 3

ciska tetai piro se mi'esku be la xaMAN. bei ge le turni pe le
nolraitru ge'u .e le viptru vu'o poi turni ro selje'a ku'o gi le nobli
be ro natmi be'o nu'i ge tecu'u ro selje'a sepi'o lo selyle'u pe ri gi
tecu'u ro natmi bau lo bangu be ri

"Shouldn't there be a {nu'u} in front of {gi}? (CLL Chapter 14, example 11..7)"

I wasn't really sure. He may very well be right. Both parse, but I'm
not sure exactly the difference is semantically (and jbofi'e doesn't
handle tagged termsets), so I was wondering if some kind jbocre can
help us out here?



So, anyone willing to answer? It came up again,
--gejyspa


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

posts: 3588

de'i li 17 pi'e 12 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Michael Turniansky .fy. cusku zoi
skamyxatra.
> Totus asked about the following at the end of Esther chapter 3
...
> So, anyone willing to answer? It came up again
.skamyxatra

This was already answered when you asked about this on the WikiDiscuss mailing
list two months ago. Since I'm not sure how to link to that list's archives,
here are the responses that were given:

Jorge:
> "Tagged termsets" or "tagged-term sets"? The former are not grammatical.
>
> Anyway, "nu'u" makes no difference, it's an elidable terminator, and
> there are two of them, one for each termset:
>
> nu'i ge tecu'u ro selje'a sepi'o lo selyle'u pe ri nu'u gi tecu'u
> ro natmi bau lo bangu be ri nu'u

You replied:
> But why then does the CLL not mark the first nu'u as elidible in the
> example cited by Andrew? I assumed that the scoping was somehow
> different between the two versions.

Jorge replied:
> I assume it's just a typo. In fact the first "nu'u" is more elidable
> than the second, because "gi" itself always shows the end of the first
> termset.

Do you still have any questions?

mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.

--
ko na xalni


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

posts: 350

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
> de'i li 17 pi'e 12 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Michael Turniansky .fy. cusku zoi
> skamyxatra.
>> Totus asked about the following at the end of Esther chapter 3
> ...
>> So, anyone willing to answer?  It came up again
> .skamyxatra
>
> This was already answered when you asked about this on the WikiDiscuss mailing
> list two months ago.  Since I'm not sure how to link to that list's archives,
> here are the responses that were given:
>
> Jorge:
>> "Tagged termsets" or "tagged-term sets"? The former are not grammatical.
>>
>> Anyway, "nu'u" makes no difference, it's an elidable terminator, and
>> there are two of them, one for each termset:
>>
>> nu'i ge tecu'u ro selje'a sepi'o lo selyle'u pe ri nu'u gi tecu'u
>> ro natmi bau lo bangu be ri nu'u
>
> You replied:
>> But why then does the CLL not mark the first nu'u as elidible in the
>> example cited by Andrew?  I assumed that the scoping was somehow
>> different between the two versions.
>
> Jorge replied:
>> I assume it's just a typo. In fact the first "nu'u" is more elidable
>> than the second, because "gi" itself always shows the end of the first
>> termset.
>
> Do you still have any questions?
>
> mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.
>
> --
> ko na xalni
>

Weird, I THOUGHT it had been answered, but I cou;dn't find the
answer.. thanks -gy


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.