From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 18 07:14:44 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 18 May 2007 07:14:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hp3E4-0001Tt-UR for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 07:14:39 -0700 Received: from express.cec.wustl.edu ([128.252.21.16]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Hp3Du-0001TQ-Es for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 18 May 2007 07:14:32 -0700 Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (hive.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.14]) by express.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id l4IEEKjN020585 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 18 May 2007 09:14:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from hive.cec.wustl.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4IEEKTd015888; Fri, 18 May 2007 09:14:20 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by hive.cec.wustl.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id l4IEEKWm015885; Fri, 18 May 2007 09:14:20 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: hive.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:14:20 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu" In-Reply-To: <2f91285f0705180657v62c66fe3q55e7b16540c5281a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <200705181505.08607.todurov@gmail.com> <1189A858F8918F43BE3F9C7603C73FB4031E7D37@0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com> <2f91285f0705180657v62c66fe3q55e7b16540c5281a@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 4503 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Fri, 18 May 2007, Vid Sintef wrote: > I understand Michael's point. > However, some collections of text on www.lojban.org show sentences without > being separated by ".i". > The following is from "terpa lo tirxu": > > A: doi patfu do terpa xu lo tirxu > B: na go'i > A: xu go'i lo cinfo > B: si'a na go'i > A: je'e .ija'o do terpa le mamta po'o > > Is this omission of ".i" a permissive, casual application for an aesthetic > reason? > Or should it be avoided as is the case in Elmo's example? That text is *not* lojban. Think of it more as a script. The text after the colons is lojban, but the framing structure (with the colons, newlines, and such) isn't. -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home. -- (Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman, Good Omens)