Received: from mail-ey0-f189.google.com ([209.85.215.189]:63312)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncCJ2UzZHuDRD1nNP3BBoEB7R5fA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1ReAGh-00075D-F0; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:55:08 -0800
Received: by eaak14 with SMTP id k14sf3621823eaa.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=59dPYeTmBnQTdaVvqnaZuTZF9FwbHrsVNFZQ5+KBSVo=;
        b=FTbMOzWDJ8XKq5v7kLj9sWhkfj33ieocK76UAFkuYozYfJe4mPfWenspLi0sA2/Z4c
         nJT1FeTcTTFDGUU9n45RwL58YbySBP8K9Ym38DBsMzIxlQvVOCAlivLTJ2uEx+UCDhnB
         fPrJnZgmAmwo2HxTmwlELHwZ4J/8whj1FR9c8=
Received: by 10.205.128.145 with SMTP id he17mr2136565bkc.2.1324666485807;
        Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:45 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.204.200.144 with SMTP id ew16ls34446893bkb.2.gmail; Fri, 23
 Dec 2011 10:54:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.145.80 with SMTP id c16mr653348bkv.2.1324666485158;
        Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.145.80 with SMTP id c16mr653347bkv.2.1324666485140;
        Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f53.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g19si11726335bkg.2.2011.12.23.10.54.45
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:45 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.53;
Received: by lagr15 with SMTP id r15so4231658lag.40
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.113.131 with SMTP id iy3mr12733019lab.39.1324666484803;
 Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.152.5.105 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:54:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20111223175808.GH23459@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
References: <20111223175808.GH23459@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:54:44 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2cEF-n3mZc4+eVCgOHfa5Bg=vsYdHZ9uBDgOWZnB3k5gw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] Can we drop the fore tanru cmavo?
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com, bpfk@lojban.org
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.53 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en_US>
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Robin Lee Powell
<rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
>
> i.e., can PEG support having one set of fore logical connectives
> only, or is the issue deeper than lookahead?

If the question is whether guheks can be replaced by geks, then the
answer is no, because tanru "gu'e broda gi brode" is different from
bridi "ge broda gi brode". Compare "(gu'e broda gi brode) ko'a" with
"ge (broda) gi (brode ko'a)".

If the question is whether guheks would be missed by anyone if they
were just dropped, then probably not. I don't think anyone ever uses
them.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.