Received: from mail-wg0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]:65242)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCMHEmaCOBhDq-63-BBoEea9jjg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1SbCPy-0004Oj-Bs; Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:40 -0700
Received: by wgbdt10 with SMTP id dt10sf2149397wgb.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
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=c3uarlZ3QjgVcCMKFbKFfJ8x8UICMFQ9/iUFuNwS134=;
        b=Iu6Y4ed/lfP8wcmuh4n/WL8dypCccLp2pn61ZdZGw0P+o4cdJOXNMxLhDJ0VW1/4zf
         addFP2/Cj5ssGQ3rjmd00Cc5g8DuRnmQCErFQUHcPX6bk1HWv/8Rah/WGWM4rq/7Xk+0
         LRgkO547W73jBqvgbUYDbYo1V20wVBKf+0xvA=
Received: by 10.205.141.82 with SMTP id jd18mr304096bkc.5.1338736106375;
        Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.204.130.152 with SMTP id t24ls3412414bks.1.gmail; Sun, 03 Jun
 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.157.134 with SMTP id b6mr1488835bkx.5.1338736104573;
        Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.157.134 with SMTP id b6mr1488833bkx.5.1338736104551;
        Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f177.google.com (mail-lb0-f177.google.com [209.85.217.177])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hy18si6956288bkc.2.2012.06.03.08.08.24
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.177 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.177;
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id gg6so3454144lbb.22
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.131.9 with SMTP id oi9mr9211370lab.39.1338736104295; Sun,
 03 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.46.36 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Jun 2012 08:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPAJj9+zXvQ7usbb4nFSfZLEzM7SnOBhaKa8pZ0yYc_v6wDO1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120601005902.GE8656@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
	<201206011710.33797.phma@phma.optus.nu>
	<CAPAJj9KUDA6790xC_h2OkCf9s+bYionJGEXZEN=A7nAaDZdveg@mail.gmail.com>
	<201206022215.57629.phma@phma.optus.nu>
	<CAPAJj9+0HkTpepuC60N0enrVtWwZhZmd=Uof077DQt--oY9BFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj1L36chDnaOr6YbhD-RmC2wkr2V37vQHiQDzzjSg-5epg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPAJj9+zXvQ7usbb4nFSfZLEzM7SnOBhaKa8pZ0yYc_v6wDO1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2012 09:08:24 -0600
Message-ID: <CAMKwHj0YB=xa9c7-5EUuGR8BHVVxuaSXBJUfMqbcyA0=Rox0eA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Directional facing (xorxes, please read).
From: Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>
To: lojban@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 209.85.217.177 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042c6477f1cb2004c192c90e
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

--f46d042c6477f1cb2004c192c90e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 8:37 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 3 June 2012 10:50, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's not a question of whether it would make sense. It can't be done.
> FAhA cmavo grammatically can not be converted. I would assume for the same
> reason the PU can not be converted, as both are tenses.
>
> Should such a restriction be formally prescribed? I don't see a need
> to have special syntax for FAhA etc. separately from BAI. It seems to
> unnecessarily complicate the grammar.
>
> FAhA, PU... these are all units of tag. If the grammar needs to
> explicitly forbid certain tags such as "se fa'a" for the lack of a
> corresponding sumti place (which is a better justification than "for
> they are 'tenses'"), it should also forbid the likes of "te fa'e" and
> "ve di'o" for the same reason ("fa'e" has no x3, and "di'o" has no
> x4). And we may wish to have in the grammar neither avoidable
> inconsistency nor unnecessary complication.
>

Except that's not true. fa'e, being the BAI form of fatne, /does/ have an
x3. And and x4, an x5, ... , and an xN. All selbri have an infinite amount
of places, all past me'ixa are undefined. As such, any form of a selbri,
such as an encapsulated sumti (i.e. lo broda) or modal (i.e. fi'o broda)
also has all the places the selbri has.

BAI add a place to the selbri, creating a new predicate. Tense words do
not. This is why they have different grammar- they fulfill different roles.

"fa'e" = "fi'o fatne"
"fa'a" != "fi'o farna"


> Many do-nots in Lojban are already based upon semantics, upon whether
> it wouldn't make sense. I don't use "ve di'o", because it doesn't make
> sense, even though grammatical; I wouldn't use "se fa'a", because it
> wouldn't make sense, even if grammatical.
>

This is not one of those cases. It is not the "semantics" that determines
this "do-not", it is the grammar.

-- 
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima 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 "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.


--f46d042c6477f1cb2004c192c90e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 8:37 AM, tijlan <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jbotijlan@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">jboti=
jlan@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s=
tyle=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class=3D"im">On 3 June 2012 10:50, Jonathan Jones &lt;<a href=3D"mailt=
o:eyeonus@gmail.com">eyeonus@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; It&#39;s not a question of whether it would make sense. It can&#39;t b=
e done. FAhA cmavo grammatically can not be converted. I would assume for t=
he same reason the PU can not be converted, as both are tenses.<br>
<br>
</div>Should such a restriction be formally prescribed? I don&#39;t see a n=
eed<br>
to have special syntax for FAhA etc. separately from BAI. It seems to<br>
unnecessarily complicate the grammar.<br>
<br>
FAhA, PU... these are all units of tag. If the grammar needs to<br>
explicitly forbid certain tags such as &quot;se fa&#39;a&quot; for the lack=
 of a<br>
corresponding sumti place (which is a better justification than &quot;for<b=
r>
they are &#39;tenses&#39;&quot;), it should also forbid the likes of &quot;=
te fa&#39;e&quot; and<br>
&quot;ve di&#39;o&quot; for the same reason (&quot;fa&#39;e&quot; has no x3=
, and &quot;di&#39;o&quot; has no<br>
x4). And we may wish to have in the grammar neither avoidable<br>
inconsistency nor unnecessary complication.<br></blockquote><div><br>Except=
 that&#39;s not true. fa&#39;e, being the BAI form of fatne, /does/ have an=
 x3. And and x4, an x5, ... , and an xN. All selbri have an infinite amount=
 of places, all past me&#39;ixa are undefined. As such, any form of a selbr=
i, such as an encapsulated sumti (i.e. lo broda) or modal (i.e. fi&#39;o br=
oda) also has all the places the selbri has.<br>
<br>BAI add a place to the selbri, creating a new predicate. Tense words do=
=20
not. This is why they have different grammar- they fulfill different roles.=
<br><br>&quot;fa&#39;e&quot; =3D &quot;fi&#39;o fatne&quot;<br>&quot;fa&#39=
;a&quot; !=3D &quot;fi&#39;o farna&quot;<br>=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204=
,204,204);padding-left:1ex">


Many do-nots in Lojban are already based upon semantics, upon whether<br>
it wouldn&#39;t make sense. I don&#39;t use &quot;ve di&#39;o&quot;, becaus=
e it doesn&#39;t make<br>
sense, even though grammatical; I wouldn&#39;t use &quot;se fa&#39;a&quot;,=
 because it<br>
wouldn&#39;t make sense, even if grammatical.<br></blockquote><div><br>This=
 is not one of those cases. It is not the &quot;semantics&quot; that determ=
ines this &quot;do-not&quot;, it is the grammar.<br><br clear=3D"all"></div=
>
</div>-- <br>mu&#39;o mi&#39;e .aionys.<br><br>.i.e&#39;ucai ko cmima lo pi=
lno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo&#39;o<br>(Come to the Dot Side! =
Luke, I am your father. :D )<br><br>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />



--f46d042c6477f1cb2004c192c90e--