From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhCqk7_lBBoEKuSTmw@googlegroups.com Fri Oct 08 18:47:37 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P4OX8-00019M-Hq; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:37 -0700 Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9sf1576079gxk.16 for ; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=/A5qe1Bj8vAHuRy/s7mboRkeRr0whX+zTVTC+Z+XyQo=; b=XFnoT9KEZ7nTpVqNq+iH4CBklTGdQSWlY1w1d74dQ2rlf47oSfa/V8ER6/opp5IHGz AE+Q+JA8xgOJ8zIw1jp+Gt+KyuRXFjbAtxSibJGlZAz7EFuAaMcnT9Jp9Ycwc+qpK6Ho AKu2inKzdld7eS/npII45goq2NSW0t8CnqYD8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; 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:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=qKIHggROzyc9yFGO+eGMcWsOh4vGOnTS8KBREngQxaJ9IaTc0uCVOFcwTg8eKT8DVy j5weWpMOi+OeIoroo+wS+IWOQgGbdZ5mrLmqyV0Ht7MWExAuEqNRzZ7fXJzk78V0oP/S xiNOTgBIxwBNkCFxVt9xR0OPkVhNtRJ6FTANk= Received: by 10.90.57.13 with SMTP id f13mr275887aga.39.1286588842358; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:22 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.123.203 with SMTP id q11ls730267ibr.2.p; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.170.213 with SMTP id e21mr1012930ibz.9.1286588842077; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.170.213 with SMTP id e21mr1012929ibz.9.1286588842045; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f175.google.com (mail-iw0-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id bm7si2427373ibb.2.2010.10.08.18.47.21; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.175; Received: by mail-iw0-f175.google.com with SMTP id 7so468915iwn.34 for ; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.245.66 with SMTP id lt2mr48036icb.116.1286588840844; Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.68 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Oct 2010 18:47:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100903032539.GY5990@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 19:47:20 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work From: Jonathan Jones To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@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: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba3fd221d49da10492254e5f --90e6ba3fd221d49da10492254e5f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/10/8 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote= : > > 2010/10/8 Jorge Llamb=EDas > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Jonathan Jones > wrote: > >> > > >> > My point is, if something said by a second person is always treated = as > >> > separate text, how does the mother finish her child's sentence? > >> > >> How can we be 100% sure that she intends to do it? We can't. I think > >> And Rosta did propose a cmavo for indicating "continuation of previous > >> speaker's utterance" once. You might find it in the experimental cmavo > >> page. > >> > >> > And since Lojban is supposed to be umambiguous, it has to be one way > or > >> > the > >> > other. Either a new speaker is always a new jufra, or only at the ne= xt > >> > {.i}, > >> > which is my preferred reading. (Or listening.) > >> > >> A new speaker is by default a new text. Anything else is unreasonable, > >> since it makes your utterances dependent on things you may not have > >> control over. > >> > >> mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > > .i ganai da'aroi lonu ranji jufra cu pilno zo .i gi na go'i > > What do you understand by "da'aroi lo nu ranji jufra"? It means > something like "all but once during the continuous sentence". > I was trying for "In all cases except those in which you are continuing the sentence". > Starting an utterance with ".i" is no guarantee that your utterance > won't be garbled if it's taken as continuation of what someone else is > saying. As a trivial example, if the other speaker ended with "zo", it > would just quote your ".i". But there are plenty of other cases that > could absorb your ".i" too. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > I can't think of any way to say this succintly, so please excuse any rambling. What I'm trying to get at is, unless the new speaker begins with {.i}, or by extension {ni'o} and related, the new speaker is to be taken as continuing the previous speaker's sentence. If, however, the new speaker does begin with {.i} or related, then /regardless/ of what the previous speaker said, it is a new sentence. .i lo nanmu cu cusku lu mi facki lodu'u zo'e lo barja cu te klama vs. .i lo nanmu cu cuksu lu mi facki lodu'u zo'e .i lo barja cu te klama Not the best example, but I can't think of anything off the top of my head in which the {.i} is swallowed. I had a difficult enough time finding an example that parsed both with and without the second {.i}. --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu d= o zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=20 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@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den. --90e6ba3fd221d49da10492254e5f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010/10/8 Jorge Llamb=EDas <= ;jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/8 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > My point is, if something said by a second person is always t= reated as
>> > separate text, how does the mother finish her child's sen= tence?
>>
>> How can we be 100% sure that she intends to do it? We can't. I= think
>> And Rosta did propose a cmavo for indicating "continuation of= previous
>> speaker's utterance" once. You might find it in the exper= imental cmavo
>> page.
>>
>> > And since Lojban is supposed to be umambiguous, it has to be = one way or
>> > the
>> > other. Either a new speaker is always a new jufra, or only at= the next
>> > {.i},
>> > which is my preferred reading. (Or listening.)
>>
>> A new speaker is by default a new text. Anything else is unreasona= ble,
>> since it makes your utterances dependent on things you may not hav= e
>> control over.
>>
>> mu'o mi'e xorxes
>
> .i ganai da'aroi lonu ranji jufra cu pilno zo .i gi na go'i
What do you understand by "da'aroi lo nu ranji jufra"? = It means
something like "all but once during the continuous sentence".
=

I was trying for "In all cases except those in w= hich you are continuing the sentence".
=A0
Starting an utterance with ".i" is no guarantee that your utteran= ce
won't be garbled if it's taken as continuation of what someone else= is
saying. As a trivial example, if the other speaker ended with "zo"= ;, it
would just quote your ".i". But there are plenty of other cases t= hat
could absorb your ".i" too.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

I can= 't think of any way to say this succintly, so please excuse any ramblin= g. What I'm trying to get at is, unless the new speaker begins with {.i= }, or by extension {ni'o} and related, the new speaker is to be taken a= s continuing the previous speaker's sentence. If, however, the new spea= ker does begin with {.i} or related, then /regardless/ of what the previous= speaker said, it is a new sentence.

.i lo nanmu cu cusku lu mi facki lodu'u zo'e
lo barja cu te = klama

vs.

.i lo nanmu cu cuksu lu mi facki lodu'u zo'= e
.i lo barja cu te klama

Not the best example, but I can't t= hink of anything off the top of my head in which the {.i} is swallowed. I h= ad a difficult enough time finding an example that parsed both with and wit= hout the second {.i}.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e= ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu do zo'o=
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
--90e6ba3fd221d49da10492254e5f--