From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Feb 12 07:53:13 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HGdUO-0002JU-Om for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:13 -0800 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HGdUG-0002JJ-39 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:12 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c31so3935937nfb for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:02 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cLFhyViA8MGTUJK2zd8pfu0OE5eNYdgICZGCrHAN5AEdv2YH4DTYyIzqIUN7a/IEwk1HpoSvyb5v7YZq3vlyXOkx544OwDYUGPMgCSuLipVzy3CN0QrmgstGDpJ7HZ7RhqsN/RgD+lxrEr9+lzpiD8+Pz51veJyebSFAWTWiCbM= Received: by 10.49.12.4 with SMTP id p4mr4206769nfi.1171295580075; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.48.219.6 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:53:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <23dc8c770702120753u53e11f27u9cb5f207c4d95579@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:53:00 +0000 From: "Karl Naylor" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: bo In-Reply-To: <925d17560702120734s5e4166c3m3fd7df9c7b85a7e7@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <23dc8c770702120645p3d547d3fyc56f98405c29c293@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560702120734s5e4166c3m3fd7df9c7b85a7e7@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: -25 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 4037 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: karl.org@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On 12/02/07, Jorge Llambías wrote: > {bo} has two functions. > Function 1: It makes a construction bind tighter than it would without bo: > In many of these cases, {bo} also allows a tag to be inserted as a > connective: > What you are thinking of are tags, not connectives. A tag between {i} and > {bo} works as a sentence connective, yes. I think this is the point that's been giving me trouble. Allowing the insertion of a tag doesn't seem to have much to do with asserting tight binding, and I've been trying to figure out why these tasks fall to a single word. Why is there not a different cmavo for 'make this tag function as a connective'? Did it just turn out that you generally want to use {bo} in these cases anyway, so they may as well be the same word? > Function 2: It makes a cmavo of NAhE work as one of LAhE: > {na'e bo ko'a} works like {la'e ko'a} I don't think I've met this function yet. It sounds confusing though, since again it's the same word that is used for 'tightest binding'.