Received: from mail-wi0-f191.google.com ([209.85.212.191]:63013) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1W0a5w-0006Pm-N6 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:43 -0800 Received: by mail-wi0-f191.google.com with SMTP id hm19sf78250wib.8 for ; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=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:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=b7M1u1A5YBh+JmB7olIlHWeGW2Q35/yQJpdRrwbLtPk=; b=L5CcjKJUgOaFr4DO7mdOLscI3VRP9Ol6GJzBDJWCoIPmyvCya9c7n2Om9+8JL+vrwD dXzLHfWZTMH4EZpbZUQKcGrmhYZSxwlqnmY8VGsGI3l09Uqv17OrhwHR5yYICdZgE/M8 tgv/Pownsel+zrIT2VlsoslQrJr6e1RDY7zH1hvLlNDz5ol9CboHXz9EUsjcHbA5tR8y +Isrgh0LRyVOhndusZFTTM/HcQLdB/lJgSLvC8mddHZw1djCLPCBAFhM0F3CAloOKs3m kxfjbhZtWtrqFXhOas0z9k+VAEIUN5Tfv9Bp19CdOINqCrDVKGAJHCZ8tn+o1KxmDDqY N9Ng== X-Received: by 10.180.11.66 with SMTP id o2mr203750wib.11.1389114329531; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:29 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.91.82 with SMTP id cc18ls660724wib.3.canary; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.14.179.134 with SMTP id h6mr1280940eem.7.1389114328468; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-x22b.google.com (mail-lb0-x22b.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c04::22b]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id rk7si8940924bkb.2.2014.01.07.09.05.28 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22b as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::22b; Received: by mail-lb0-f171.google.com with SMTP id w7so490166lbi.30 for ; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.22.201 with SMTP id g9mr4091648laf.27.1389114328093; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.11.4 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 09:05:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <52CB3AC2.3070507@gmx.de> <0413ea89-18e2-42df-8725-f150e2eb34e9@googlegroups.com> Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 15:05:28 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] [oz] Use of elidable {cu} From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22b as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com 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=089e0158c30814176b04ef646228 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e0158c30814176b04ef646228 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis < felipeg.assis@gmail.com> wrote: > > With regards to compound tags, don't you have to understand the rules > anyway to get the correct meaning? > If you follow the official rules, yes. > Can you give an example? > Things like "ze'i co'a" being fine, but "co'a ze'i" oficially being really "co'a ku ze'i". One problem with that is that "lo ze'i co'a broda" is fine, but "lo co'a ze'i broda" is not, although you can always cheat by using "lo co'a ja'a ze'i broda". > The way I would rather do it is: >> >> term-1 <- sumti / ( !gek (tag !selbri-1 / FA-clause free*) (sumti / >> KU-clause? free*) ) / termset / NA-clause KU-clause free* >> >> which means that the tag will not be absorbed as a term if it's directly >> followed by a selbri-1 (in which case it will be absorbed by the selbri >> rule), >> >> > That is a mid-ground more appropriate for an eventual proposal. I would > support it. > > In production, though, I still prefer to always use {ku}, because I find > {gau se ka'a ko'a} and {bai gau se ka'a ko'a} confusing for the same > reason: I keep expecting the selbri they refer to. > Yes, it's more of a theoretical than a practical issue. Very few tags are actually used in the tag ku construct, and having more than one in the same sentence is rare. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --089e0158c30814176b04ef646228 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis = <felipeg.as= sis@gmail.com> wrote:
=

With regards to compound tags, don'= t you have to understand the rules anyway to get the correct meaning?

If you follow the offici= al rules, yes.
=A0
Can you give an = example?

Things= like "ze'i co'a" being fine, but "co'a ze'i= " oficially being really "co'a ku ze'i".

One problem with that is that "lo ze'i co'= a broda" is fine, but "lo co'a ze'i broda" is not, a= lthough you can always cheat by using "lo co'a ja'a ze'i b= roda". =A0
=A0
The way I would rather do it is:

term-1 <- sumt= i / ( !gek (tag !selbri-1 / FA-clause free*) (sumti / KU-clause? free*) ) /= termset / NA-clause KU-clause free*

which means that the tag will not be a= bsorbed as a term if it's directly followed by a selbri-1 (in which cas= e it will be absorbed by the selbri rule),


That is a mid-= ground more appropriate for an eventual proposal. I would support it.
In production, though, I still prefer to always use {ku}, because I find= {gau se ka'a ko'a} and {bai gau se ka'a ko'a} confusing fo= r the same reason: I keep expecting the selbri they refer to.

Yes, it's more of a = theoretical than a practical issue. Very few tags are actually used in the = tag ku construct, and having more than one in the same sentence is rare.

mu'o mi'e xorxes
=A0=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http:= //groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--089e0158c30814176b04ef646228--