From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhCk0MjlBBoEwQHGpg@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 10 13:55:17 2010 Received: from mail-gx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.161.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P52vJ-0005Hb-O8; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:17 -0700 Received: by gxk9 with SMTP id 9sf2671047gxk.16 for ; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:07 -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=leL/IhEkF2/m4QyucPArVY77Fl0B81D5zMF240HXx24=; b=lwHoWvSoc491f6+3LEb1pLZFtB1PEN3BfpbFZZYzvTQOyEQGTSPz3cywSnQtiYqq6D 3BGrPeNHB27a61PVHAjE1krWGwAdhAVb+GmHIecwX6cjcwVVnQgZefR1csGmAysmjYTa N4+SYsC5WPe8NcWBD1TfnmE7j5H5C8LG8Hiwg= 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=h2RAn1AvV6ijAUeXDAtdOsCuEVIWBn7/6TjF3a4mFZJGJtIwBVaOhBhEBYPkAGLcMa NUG1ujuubB17sSzBsAbEN3vmVCin2j2mZYk9AUKzcUVB46twEZDZIYSKdNQ65Tj43sO+ k5e0S0TrX1A4/lbXte8oXOvmyA+V9SZrEkP7g= Received: by 10.91.199.12 with SMTP id b12mr376234agq.16.1286744100975; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.123.203 with SMTP id q11ls1404681ibr.2.p; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.161.78 with SMTP id q14mr1316564ibx.10.1286744100791; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.161.78 with SMTP id q14mr1316563ibx.10.1286744100759; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b32si3506461ibq.5.2010.10.10.13.54.59; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.172; Received: by iwn10 with SMTP id 10so3716455iwn.31 for ; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:54:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.151.135 with SMTP id c7mr3998730ibw.184.1286744099468; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:54:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.68 with HTTP; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:54:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4CB0B239.50107@lojban.org> <4CB1F3EA.5000608@lojban.org> <4CB20ADF.6050500@lojban.org> <4CB223F7.1060402@lojban.org> Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 14:54:59 -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 209.85.214.172 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=0050450144a8f73ac20492497431 --0050450144a8f73ac20492497431 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/10/10 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Robert LeChevalier > wrote: > > > > The problem I thought was being discussed was how to identify something > as > > syntactically part of someone else's text. > > You seemed to be arguing that that was the case by default, and you > needed a FAhO to break that default, which is contrary to everything I > have ever learned about Lojban. > > Let me put it this way: > > A: (something that parses correctly on its own) > B: (something that parses correctly on its own) > > My default assumption is that what A said is one text, and what B said > is another text. In some special cases, B may be adding something to > A's text, but normally they are just responding to A's text with their > own new text. > > That's the Lojban I have learned starting from your lessons. Is that > not your current understanding too? > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > If what B says is parsable, but would cause jbofi'e to say "selbri may be missing on line x column x", then I would probably assume that it is a continuation. That's the first thing I look for to determine if the new speaker's utterance is a case of continuation or of an elided {.i}. However= , that assumption really depends on context more than anything else. --=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. --0050450144a8f73ac20492497431 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010/10/10 Jorge Llamb=EDas &l= t;jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Robert LeChevalier <<= a href=3D"mailto:lojbab@lojban.org">lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> The problem I thought was being discussed was how to identify somethin= g as
> syntactically part of someone else's text.

You seemed to be arguing that that was the case by default, and you needed a FAhO to break that default, which is contrary to everything I
have ever learned about Lojban.

Let me put it this way:

A: =A0(something that parses correctly on its own)
B: =A0(something that parses correctly on its own)

My default assumption is that what A said is one text, and what B said
is another text. In some special cases, B may be adding something to
A's text, but normally they are just responding to A's text with th= eir
own new text.

That's the Lojban I have learned starting from your lessons. Is that not your current understanding too?

mu'o mi'e xorxes

If what B says is pars= able, but would cause jbofi'e to say "selbri may be missing on lin= e x column x", then I would probably assume that it is a continuation.= That's the first thing I look for to determine if the new speaker'= s utterance is a case of continuation or of an elided {.i}. However, that a= ssumption really depends on context more than anything else.

--
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.
--0050450144a8f73ac20492497431--