Received: from mail-bk0-f61.google.com ([209.85.214.61]:35430)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBC65FOEL4UJRBA5YVOBQKGQEH52VYHY@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1TJ1Sd-0004WU-NP; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:35 -0700
Received: by bkcjg15 with SMTP id jg15sf2804626bkc.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        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=QGRaDc2Ul44lWDgRtAoNxnYnf7QLtuiw0XKaJmU5ySk=;
        b=yo5Q0l1B1g08VIwZN3sD//ZYiaJHQpQFRtH2MOpO1oGO2DRWWDoa0YAId6tVcyMLbI
         u7PCXIVPUbSIjJ3w86R/FMODCRfA+nLUc+6+GMnqywR7Q0Ul5oPR0qA82ljMK12QCyhx
         NzIbZ4Ih3Q7gInyHskoa4kWyvKRfh4WIIX8wzq6nTVl0qQir2X2BbeUDWNgXM5QEYXi5
         TWzSOk5ruxaabkeKdZafx1yU7CGCvgc5mlwdotT+BCg9QqHcXsaCZtBaxG/B3gTHGNJu
         rItckDViieecKd5b8DhiyZRIDVp9M83cAzYyolBwRf0Pkpk9w0eOJs3zbepMDZI9Kwvb
         KRSQ==
Received: by 10.180.19.34 with SMTP id b2mr1602939wie.1.1349180419987;
        Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.73.226 with SMTP id o2ls1033634wiv.0.gmail; Tue, 02 Oct
 2012 05:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.107.167 with SMTP id hd7mr2599977wib.0.1349180419386;
        Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.107.167 with SMTP id hd7mr2599976wib.0.1349180419368;
        Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net. [213.165.64.23])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id hm1si115724wib.3.2012.10.02.05.20.19;
        Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 213.165.64.23 as permitted sender) client-ip=213.165.64.23;
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 Oct 2012 12:20:18 -0000
Received: from p57A08B02.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.1.33]) [87.160.139.2]
  by mail.gmx.net (mp041) with SMTP; 02 Oct 2012 14:20:18 +0200
X-Authenticated: #54293076
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18dNUUBSS0daSIQ9As9w1A+/FW05h++uBg5CDOFHB
	75nVto698WuhJL
Message-ID: <506ADBFD.7080603@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:20:13 +0200
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] What place of nesting bridi {ce'u} refers to?
References: <f844c363-6f7f-4f2e-80fb-8428cb9ab3f4@googlegroups.com> <20121001200454.GV1589@nvg.org> <5069F9D3.804@gmx.de> <58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@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 213.165.64.23 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: <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="------------080607080600030304010201"
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.
--------------080607080600030304010201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Am 02.10.2012 10:26, schrieb la gleki:
>
>     > * lo ka clani
>     >    being long (OR being a dimension of length OR being a
>     standard of length)
>
>     Right, but much more than with "ke'a", where this is handled much
>     more
>     loosely, the convention is that "ce'u" fills the first empty slot.
>
>
> So if there are no {ce'u}  specified we must understand it as the=20
> first and only the first slot is filled with omitted {ce'u}. If two or=20
> more of the slots of the  nested brivla are filled we must specify all=20
> of them (like in {mi e do simxu lo ka ce'u ce'u prami}), right?

That is the current standard, yes. An omitted ce'u was originally=20
intended to fill any place that made sense, just like ke'a. I think I=20
prefer the current standard of ce'u filling the first empty slot.

> That would make sense however this is something that must be included=20
> into CLL 2.0.

Depending on how much support this convention has, it will be.

> IMO {ce'u}-izing gimste is also a must.

By ce'u-izing, do you mean making any abtraction that requires you to=20
refer to an outside sumti a ka-abstraction? If so, tsani would certainly=20
be very happy. I see two slight disadvantages to this approach and one=20
advantage. I don't know which one overweighs.

The advantage is that a lot of "nonsense" sentences become easier to=20
identify as being "nonsense", e.g. "mi kakne lo nu ta pelxu" wouldn't=20
happen anymore. However, even such sentences can easily be made to make=20
sense by saying that the kakne1 appears in some other place, probably=20
do'e. Of course, this is an indicator that ce'u was the right thing to=20
begin with, so this is not a strong counter-position.
Personally, the disadvantages I see are mainly these two:

1. ka-abstractions are not events, so they are much more awkward to use=20
/ incompatible with other places that don't accept ka. "lo se zukte be=20
do mi pluka" becomes wrong when zukte2 is a ka.
2. Too many ce'u. What do you do with nested ka-abstractions and ce'u?=20
It causes some additional work in some cases to indicate which of the=20
ce'u one is currently using. Subscripting is not very elegant in my=20
opinion. (This becomes worse when ce'u can also appear in a=20
nu-abstraction, which is one reason I'm not sure about it).This wouldn't=20
be an extremely common problem, but it's potentially there.

(Relatedly, I'm also not a huge fan of boolean ka, but that might not be=20
of importance here.)

> btw, dont you think that we can use {ce'u} in {mi djica lo ka/nu=20
> **ce'u** citka lo plise} instead of {vo'a/mi}?

tsani already answered this, but note that it's usually not accepted to=20
use ce'u in a nu. Personally, I'm still undecided about ce'u in a nu,=20
however. In any case, you'd usually either have "lo ka ce'u" or "lo nu=20
[vo'a]".

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--=20
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u
    .i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u
ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu
    .i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi
gi'e s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi
    .i ta=E1=BB=8B bo pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku

--=20
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@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.


--------------080607080600030304010201
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUTF-8" http-equiv=3D"Content-Type=
">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
    <div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix"><tt>Am 02.10.2012 10:26, schrieb la
        gleki:</tt><tt><br>
      </tt></div>
    <blockquote
      cite=3D"mid:58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@googlegroups.com"
      type=3D"cite"><tt><br>
      </tt>
      <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left:
        0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><tt>&gt; *
          lo ka clani
        </tt><tt><br>
        </tt><tt>&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0being long (OR being a dimension of leng=
th OR
          being a standard of length)
        </tt><tt><br>
        </tt>
        <tt><br>
        </tt><tt>Right, but much more than with "ke'a", where this is
          handled much more </tt><tt><br>
        </tt><tt>loosely, the convention is that "ce'u" fills the first
          empty slot.
        </tt><tt><br>
        </tt></blockquote>
      <div><tt><br>
        </tt></div>
      <div><tt>So if there are no {ce'u} =C2=A0specified we must understand
          it as the first and only the first slot is filled with omitted
          {ce'u}. If two or more of the slots of the =C2=A0nested brivla ar=
e
          filled we must specify all of them (like in {mi e do simxu lo
          ka ce'u ce'u prami}), right?</tt></div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
    </tt><tt>That is the current standard, yes. An omitted ce'u was
      originally intended to fill any place that made sense, just like
      ke'a. I think I prefer the current standard of ce'u filling the
      first empty slot.</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
      cite=3D"mid:58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@googlegroups.com"
      type=3D"cite">
      <div><tt>That would make sense however this is something that must
          be included into CLL 2.0.</tt></div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
    </tt><tt>Depending on how much support this convention has, it will
      be.</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
      cite=3D"mid:58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@googlegroups.com"
      type=3D"cite">
      <div><tt>IMO=C2=A0{ce'u}-izing gimste is also a must. </tt><tt><br>
        </tt></div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
    </tt><tt>By ce'u-izing, do you mean making any abtraction that
      requires you to refer to an outside sumti a ka-abstraction? If so,
      tsani would certainly be very happy. I see two slight
      disadvantages to this approach and one advantage. I don't know
      which one overweighs.</tt><tt><br>
      <br>
    </tt><tt>The advantage is that a lot of "nonsense" sentences become
      easier to identify as being "nonsense", e.g. "mi kakne lo nu ta
      pelxu" wouldn't happen anymore. However, even such sentences can
      easily be made to make sense by saying that the kakne1 appears in
      some other place, probably do'e. Of course, this is an indicator
      that ce'u was the right thing to begin with, so this is not a
      strong counter-position.</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>Personally, the disadvantages I see are mainly these two:</tt>=
<tt><br>
      <br>
    </tt><tt>1. ka-abstractions are not events, so they are much more
      awkward to use / incompatible with other places that don't accept
      ka. </tt><tt>"lo se zukte be do mi pluka" becomes wrong when
      zukte2 is a ka.</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>2. Too many ce'u. What do you do with nested
      ka-abstractions and ce'u? It causes some additional work in some
      cases to indicate which of the ce'u one is currently using.
      Subscripting is not very elegant in my opinion. (This becomes
      worse when ce'u can also appear in a nu-abstraction, which is one
      reason I'm not sure about it).</tt><tt> This wouldn't be an
      extremely common problem, but it's potentially there.<br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>(</tt><tt>Relatedly, I'm also not a huge fan of boolean ka,
      but that might not be of importance here.</tt><tt>)</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt>
    <blockquote
      cite=3D"mid:58680262-ade6-45c0-bd7b-875fcc55a353@googlegroups.com"
      type=3D"cite">
      <div><tt>btw, dont you think that we can use {ce'u} in {mi djica
          lo ka/nu *</tt><tt><b>ce'u</b></tt><tt>* citka lo plise}
          instead of {vo'a/mi}?</tt></div>
    </blockquote>
    <tt><br>
    </tt><tt>tsani already answered this, but note that it's usually not
      accepted to use ce'u in a nu. Personally, I'm still undecided
      about ce'u in a nu, however. In any case, you'd usually either
      have "lo ka ce'u" or "lo nu [vo'a]".</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>mu'o mi'e la selpa'i</tt><tt><br>
    </tt>
    <pre class=3D"moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u
   .i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u
ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu
   .i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi
gi'e s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi
   .i ta=E1=BB=8B bo pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku</pre>
  </body>
</html>

<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 />



--------------080607080600030304010201--