Received: from mail-fa0-f58.google.com ([209.85.161.58]:57720) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1WbZ43-0006s2-0A for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:42 -0700 Received: by mail-fa0-f58.google.com with SMTP id k1sf235709fak.13 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) 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=UodxeaEf+NGHnumNLoIA28WkG0whnCeFIqf/bjY9LI0=; b=oHtn0tJpJkPVDg0PRYzhYmYo2P67emz/eAWlNB/QOEkgj4vgd0S1GHJnTIuKHqthsK sq64SCgcCtQTpNAsC5ma/XB370nyTzHbq3tTaDZYyWbb8fOEjGGvtL0MnOCe5JxQ/fwY NNe9QLInfJ9HYE1CWiaVVOiMwrQoyM5xXSbCorfzMnnvm1DlKRnp4RJOy+OInDxAB9HW 8csNbcSjfpsY6YEmvk/3MfmO0j/F1ZfWZwp/UYU7Co8xRr+Ly15x5ISYxOxvWwyvhKiE TUSrJKnwJT5nkEOXc4AQ8njsV6lDUUcGQ0pwABH5WRaIgKBp/ni0k9MB/fDb/SzACqy7 U0cQ== X-Received: by 10.180.89.210 with SMTP id bq18mr45639wib.3.1397928498695; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.80.136 with SMTP id r8ls197293wix.13.canary; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.15.34.194 with SMTP id e42mr1966651eev.0.1397928498100; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c03::235]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id jc9si97420wic.0.2014.04.19.10.28.18 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::235 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c03::235; Received: by mail-we0-x235.google.com with SMTP id q58so2471672wes.40 for ; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.205.35 with SMTP id ld3mr105900wjc.82.1397928497855; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.25.163 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:28:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140419024554.302387e6@aol.com> References: <20140419024554.302387e6@aol.com> Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 21:28:17 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] jbovlaste, vlatai, camxes and morphology From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::235 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@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=047d7b6dc6088944e404f768974a X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --047d7b6dc6088944e404f768974a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2014-04-19 4:45 GMT+04:00 Wuzzy : > Am Fri, 18 Apr 2014 16:08:36 -0300 > schrieb Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : > > > The issues with cmevla and fu'ivla have to do with which syllables are > > considered acceptable in Lojban words. CLL is not completely clear on > > that, and that's why different parsers went with different things. > Wow. If this is true, then things are seriously messed up in Lojban. The > morphology is a core part of the language. And that part is not well > defined? I never really noticed that but I fear this is actually true. > Seriously, this sucks. I think a revision of the CLL is badly > needed. > The point is that camxes was indeed a major change in the language but it hadnt much to do with CLL that's why few mention it when speaking about changes in lojban. however, i wonder why {relmast} is no longer valid. How can it even break self-segregation? > If there is no formalization, parsers are doomed to give different > or nonsensical results. If parsers are doomed to give such > results, the issues for jbovlaste can not be fixed. But then this means > the bug does neither lie in jbovlaste, nor in vlatai nor in camxes. The > bug appears to be actually in Lojban itself. Seriously, I hate to type > this, but: This is messed up. :-( > > -- > 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 > email 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/d/optout. > --=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/d/optout. --047d7b6dc6088944e404f768974a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



2014-04-19 4:45 GMT+04:00 Wuzzy <almikes@aol.com>:
=
Am Fri, 18 Apr 2014 16:08:36 -0300
schrieb Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjl= lambias@gmail.com>:

> The issues with cmevla and fu'ivla have to do with which syllables= are
> considered acceptable in Lojban words. CLL is not completely clear on<= br> > that, and that's why different parsers went with different things.=
Wow. If this is true, then things are seriously messed up in Lojban. = The
morphology is a core part of the language. And that part is not well
defined? I never really noticed that but I fear this is actually true.
Seriously, this sucks. I think a revision of the CLL is badly
needed.

The point is that camxes was in= deed a major change in the language but it hadnt much to do with CLL that&#= 39;s why few mention it when speaking about changes in lojban.

however, i wonder why {relmast} is no longer valid. How can = it even break self-segregation?


If there is no formalization, parsers are doomed to give different
or nonsensical results. If parsers are doomed to give such
results, the issues for jbovlaste can not be fixed. But then this means
the bug does neither lie in jbovlaste, nor in vlatai nor in camxes. The
bug appears to be actually in Lojban itself. Seriously, I hate to type
this, but: This is messed up. :-(

--
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+uns= ubscribe@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/d/optout.

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--047d7b6dc6088944e404f768974a--