Lojban In General

Posted by pdf23ds on Tue 24 of Jun, 2008 07:41 GMT posts: 143

The current PEG doesn't match {ni'o ba bo broda}. I wouldn't think
this was a problem, except that it also doesn't match {ni'o i ba bo
broda}. I know la nicte cadzu uses the former somewhere. Is this a
problem? I think you should always be able to attach indicators and
tags to a whole sentence, including using bo, and I can understand
that they aren't allowed on a whole paragraph, but excluding the first
sentence of the paragraph as well (but not the first sentence of the
text, where the text production has a bunch of ad-hoc things to match
initial miscellany) is just silly.

Chris Capel
--
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)

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.

> The current PEG doesn't match {ni'o ba bo broda}. I wouldn't think
> this was a problem, except that it also doesn't match {ni'o i ba bo
> broda}. I know la nicte cadzu uses the former somewhere. Is this a
> problem? I think you should always be able to attach indicators and
> tags to a whole sentence, including using bo, and I can understand
> that they aren't allowed on a whole paragraph, but excluding the first
> sentence of the paragraph as well (but not the first sentence of the
> text, where the text production has a bunch of ad-hoc things to match
> initial miscellany) is just silly.

Most people seem to agree that {ni'o} should be moved to selma'o I.

People like xorxes want to ditch a lot of other selma'o as well, so I guess
maybe we're waiting for a grand selma'o rationalization proposal instead of
attempting to make official particular changes like this one?

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se

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.

Posted by adamgarrigus on Tue 24 of Jun, 2008 13:53 GMT posts: 92

> The current PEG doesn't match {ni'o ba bo broda}. I wouldn't think
> this was a problem, except that it also doesn't match {ni'o i ba bo
> broda}. I know la nicte cadzu uses the former somewhere. Is this a
> problem? I think you should always be able to attach indicators and
> tags to a whole sentence, including using bo, and I can understand
> that they aren't allowed on a whole paragraph, but excluding the first
> sentence of the paragraph as well (but not the first sentence of the
> text, where the text production has a bunch of ad-hoc things to match
> initial miscellany) is just silly.

I'm guessing the rationale is that it doesn't make sense to tightly bind a
sentences across a paragraph/topic boundary. If you want to bind two
sentences, the second one is probably not a new topic. Does it match a {ba
bo broda} at the start of a text?

mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan

On 6/24/08, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm guessing the rationale is that it doesn't make sense to tightly bind a
> sentences across a paragraph/topic boundary.

Presumably {ni'o ba bo} would tightly bind two paragraphs, not just two
sentences. There are grammatical ways of doing it:

tu'e ni'o .... tu'u .i ba bo tu'e ni'o ..... tu'u

But this way you have to plan ahead and it's more wordy.

> If you want to bind two
> sentences, the second one is probably not a new topic. Does it match a {ba
> bo broda} at the start of a text?

I think the {babo} construction is not normally really used to bind tightly,
as it's suposed to be, but to connect two sentences with {ba}. {ba} is the
critical word in the usage, not {bo}. Similarly for other tag-bo's. The problem
is that it can't be done unless you also bind tightly, and from the point of
view of the grammar {bo} is the more critical word.

One way would be to use {ba la'e di'u} or {ba ku} instead, but the first is too
long and the second is somewhat vague. {la'e di'u} should have been a
single short cmavo, based on its very frequent use.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

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.

On 6/24/08, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> One way would be to use {ba la'e di'u} or {ba ku} instead, but the first is
> too
> long and the second is somewhat vague.

The construction that's usually made the most
sense to me lately is to use sumtcita and an abstraction instead of going to
another sentence:

"broda pu lo nu brode"

"broda se mu'i lo nu brode se ri'a lo nu brodi"

mu'o mi'e .selkik. mi'e .bret.