{sei ... se'u} inside {lu ...li'u} must be a part of th= e quote however xorxe's Alice in Wonderland uses that to translate quotes s= plit into several parts. I'm not the only person who thinks that this is wr= ong.

IMO {sei} has at least three different meanings.

1. As an alternative to UI ({sei mi gleki= ~=3D .ui})
2. As an alternative to moving= the outer bridi into the inner bridi ({do melbi sei mi jinvi}=3D{mi jinvi = lo du'u do melbi})

3. To translate partitioned quotations.

All of these meanings are actually the same.= In every case, it's "meaning #2".

{.i do melbi sei mi cusku} -> {.i mi cusku lo se du'u do melbi}
{.i ui do cinba mi} -> {.i sei mi gleki do cinba mi} -> {.i mi= gleki lo nu do cinba mi}

Personally, I disapprove= of sei-within-lu for partitioned quotes, for the simple reason that one ca= n't unambiguously determine whether the sei-clause is actually spoken, unle= ss {sa'a} is used (which it usually isn't).

Some time ago i proposed {xoi} to replace the second meaning = of {sei}. And now here is my solution for the third meaning.<= /div>

Repl= acing any meanings of sei with another word is unnecessary because {sei} on= ly really has one meaning.

How = can you distinguish between

{do cusku lu do klama = mi li'u}

and

{do cusku lo nu do klama mi}

<= div>using {sei}?

Proposal.
The same FA two times i= n a bridi should mean {je} according i.e.

{fe lo barda ku mi pu viska fe lo gerku}=3D{mi pu viska lo ba= rda je gerku}.

This system seems inco= nsistent: a sumti operation, namely the use of FA, causes a selbri effect.<= /div>

Needless to say that "it's = a big dog" is rather {ko'a barda je gerku} rather than {ko'a barda gerku} a= s natlangish tanru i.e. metaphors i.e. noun phrases with adjectives are not= necessary in a logical style of lojban.

Now such proposal allow= s us to express divided quotations

xorxe's solution: {lu k= o klama mi sei la alis cu cusku se'u i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u} (25 sy= llables)

gleki's solution: {lu ko klama mi li'u se cusku la alis= fa lu i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u} (26 syllables)

As I mentioned above, = where's the {je} ? What selbri is it connecting?

Oh sorry. The rule is {li'u je lu} annihilates itse= lf. The order is important.

{lu ko klama mi li'u se = cusku la alis fa lu i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u} =3D>

{fa lu ko klama mi li'u fa lu i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u se cusku = la alis} =3D>

{fa lu ko klama mi [li'u fa lu= ] i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u se cusku la alis} =3D>
{lu ko klama mi i mi djica lo nu catlu do li'u se cusku la alis}

=
Furthermore, if double-FA should have some= connective implication, it should certainly not be a logical connective. I= propose something far more vague, like {ju'e}.

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/3n= CYou4bYYgJ.
=20 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.
------=_Part_231_28672161.1356370943494--