Received: from mail-bk0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:64464) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1T2sXP-0002cq-E6; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:45 -0700 Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4sf1631083bkw.16 for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-authenticated:x-provags-id:message-id :date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-y-gmx-trusted: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=cAE8SCVAOlkBQVxUD6uDOrq/UVAHQ3h/xuSHEJTYVaQ=; b=asOUL6ESUneSGlxEq0XKaFjfxL/1dnLfX//6VkbQDWNtgWpwSLM+Qs5dXtspfRI7s5 4zIZAJashZYxVMoQucc9SWRHBfYubsKDa+9Ccb0btGD6CGHDytn3YRfBDo7CrNqats5c 49R5OZPOmf8bG9wl17UBEj/IGDQIvj/eEDPP0= Received: by 10.216.132.217 with SMTP id o67mr195166wei.84.1345332868414; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:28 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.82.231 with SMTP id l7ls3247110wiy.4.canary; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.181.11.234 with SMTP id el10mr1201118wid.2.1345332867500; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.181.11.234 with SMTP id el10mr1201117wid.2.1345332867485; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net. [213.165.64.22]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id hm1si2103127wib.3.2012.08.18.16.34.27; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender) client-ip=213.165.64.22; Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2012 23:34:27 -0000 Received: from p57A085EF.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.33]) [87.160.133.239] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 19 Aug 2012 01:34:27 +0200 X-Authenticated: #54293076 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19Os+5IfpZOA+5rcdOjDAfskw9xu1l/BopjV8qzzA vKyU2iQO3sabYJ Message-ID: <50302680.2090609@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 01:34:24 +0200 From: selpa'i User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Let's move {soi} to JOI. And why can't places be interconnected in lojban predicates? References: <16cab846-3f84-4bc6-b64f-56aeab08244b@googlegroups.com> <536d8399-344f-41e4-9315-27c7d8c95176@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <536d8399-344f-41e4-9315-27c7d8c95176@googlegroups.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Original-Sender: seladwa@gmx.de X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.22 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=seladwa@gmx.de Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030306010805000807090905" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030306010805000807090905 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Am 18.08.2012 20:14, schrieb djandus: > Whenever I first learned {soi}, I had a similar thought, but slightly > different. It's not to take SOI and make it JOI, because that's > basically completely undesired. Instead, it would say: > > Use SOI like JOI between sumti, but /only/ between sumti. (SOI thus > allows {ku} elision) What do you mean? ku can always be elided, even with JOI: lo mlatu joi lo gerku There was a time when this didn't work due to parser limitations, but we're long past that. > SOI, like JOI, is allowed to make a SOI series. ({ko'a soi ko'e soi > ko'i} is allowed.) SOI asserts that all sumti in the series can be > swapped in any order without changing the validity of the overall > bridi. Otherwise, you can remove all SOI (and insert the possibly > elided {ku} where necessary) and parse the bridi exactly. (So every > sumti still falls into the place structure as if SOI wasn't there, > except that the components of the series can be swapped and replaced > in any order.) A similar thing happens in my proposal too, but this is a bit weird, because you're filling one sumti place while leaving all the others empy. > The benefit is that > mi prami do soi vo'a vo'e > is shortened to > mi soi do prami > And even more beneficial are longer statements, such as > mi bevri lo tanxe ku ti soi tu ca'o bi cacra ca lo cabdei > "I carried boxes there and back for eight hours today." mi bevri lo tanxe ti fa'u tu ze'a lo cacra be li bi ca lo cabdei > [...] > > However, this type of change sorely disagrees with current usage, so a > new word would be more proper than a replacement. soi sees extremely little usage; almost any change is an improvement, but moving soi to JOI is a bit odd, it still feels hackish. My suggestion doesn't break usage though, if that's really of importance. mu'o mi'e la selpa'i -- pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo -- 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. --------------030306010805000807090905 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Am 18.08.2012 20:14, schrieb djandus:
Whenever I first learned {soi}, I had a similar thought, but slightly different. It's not to take SOI and make it JOI, because that's basically completely undesired. Instead, it would say:

Use SOI like JOI between sumti, but only between sumti. (SOI thus allows {ku} elision)

What do you mean? ku can always be elided, even with JOI: lo mlatu joi lo gerku
There was a time when this didn't work due to parser limitations, but we're long past that.

SOI, like JOI, is allowed to make a SOI series. ({ko'a soi ko'e soi ko'i} is allowed.) SOI asserts that all sumti in the series can be swapped in any order without changing the validity of the overall bridi. Otherwise, you can remove all SOI (and insert the possibly elided {ku} where necessary) and parse the bridi exactly. (So every sumti still falls into the place structure as if SOI wasn't there, except that the components of the series can be swapped and replaced in any order.)

A similar thing happens in my proposal too, but this is a bit weird, because you're filling one sumti place while leaving all the others empy.

The benefit is that
mi prami do soi vo'a vo'e
is shortened to
mi soi do prami
And even more beneficial are longer statements, such as
mi bevri lo tanxe ku ti soi tu ca'o bi cacra ca lo cabdei
"I carried boxes there and back for eight hours today."

mi bevri lo tanxe ti fa'u tu ze'a lo cacra be li bi ca lo cabdei

[...]

However, this type of change sorely disagrees with current usage, so a new word would be more proper than a replacement.

soi sees extremely little usage; almost any change is an improvement, but moving soi to JOI is a bit odd, it still feels hackish. My suggestion doesn't break usage though, if that's really of importance.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
-- 
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

--
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.
--------------030306010805000807090905--