Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 00:29:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <d73e2a72-cb9e-495d-9dc5-3e22878a41c2@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <a9475bfd-ac16-40ce-bb60-7b2a057a681d@googlegroups.com>
References: <a9475bfd-ac16-40ce-bb60-7b2a057a681d@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [lojban] Re: {tu'e...tu'u} in NU
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3222_887273112.1436945354629"
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -2.0
X-Spam_score_int: -19
X-Spam_bar: --

------=_Part_3222_887273112.1436945354629
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_3223_1914096933.1436945354630"

------=_Part_3223_1914096933.1436945354630
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Le mercredi 15 juillet 2015 04:26:50 UTC, Spheniscine (la zipcpi) a =C3=A9c=
rit :
>
> One problem that crops up now and then concerns how to include more than=
=20
> one bridi within a NU clause. An example is my translation of Deuteronomy=
=20
> 8:12~14, which I have rendered:
>
> .i tezu'ebo rivbi va'o lo nu do mo'u citka jebo cu tolxagji je cu zbasu l=
o=20
>> zabna zdani je cu xabju ri
>> ju'ei loi cagda'u be do ferti se panzi ju'ei loi rijno joi loi solji vu'=
o=20
>> po do zei'a sormei ju'ei loi ro se ponse be do zei'asai sormei kei
>> lo nu lo menli be do co'a se'ijgi ju'ei do tolmo'i tu'a la .iauex. ku no=
i=20
>> cevni do je noi vimcu do la .misr. ku no'u le tutra pe lo ka bapse'u
>
>
> (note, uses simplified connectives, the experimental tag {zei'a} which is=
=20
> basically {fi'o te zenba}: {zei'a sormei} means "increasingly many" / "to=
=20
> increase in number", and {ju'ei}, which shall be discussed. Yes, I'm pret=
ty=20
> terrible with abusing experimental constructs.)
>
> There are several solutions:
> official-Lojban solution #1: use {ju'e ... gi ...}. Requires forethought,=
=20
> and only takes two bridi. Chaining them to allow more is impractical.
>
> official-Lojban solution #2: close each NU clause then join it to a new=
=20
> abstractor sumti. e.g. {lo nu broda kei jo'u lo nu brode}. Pretty wordy.
>
>

If you need a structure similar to your translation above, official-Lojban=
=20
solution #2 must be rather {lo nu broda kei ju'e nu brode}.

=20

> experimental-grammar solution #1: {ju'ei}; essentially acts like a=20
> tight-scope {.i} that doesn't close sub-clauses. {lo nu broda ju'ei brode=
}.=20
> Has the advantage of not requiring forethought, but has the disadvantage =
of=20
> not automatically closing any bridi tails; if one of your abstraction-bri=
di=20
> happens to contain a lot of nested NU or POI, they must be closed manuall=
y.
>
> experimental-grammar solution #2: Allow {tu'e...tu'u} to act as a single=
=20
> bridi in NU clauses: {lo nu tu'e broda .i brode tu'u}. Does require=20
> forethought, but gives a new "level zero" for {.i} to automatically reset=
=20
> to until closed by {tu'u}.
>
>

La zantufa-0.2 ( http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa-0.2.html )=20
allows a full statement in noi-clause or nu-clause. It means the following=
=20
texts are parsed by la zantufa-0.2 as follows:

1. sentences connected with {i JOI} or {i (tag) bo}:

{nu broda i ju'e brode}
(CU [nu {<CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)> <i ju'e (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)>=
} KEI] VAU)=20
{nu broda i bo brode}
(CU [nu {<CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)> <i bo (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)>} =
KEI] VAU)=20
{nu broda i ba bo brode}
(CU [nu {<CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)> <i ba bo (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)=
>} KEI] VAU)=20

Use KEI or KUhO to cut the statement:

{nu broda kei i ju'e brode}
([CU {nu <CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)> kei} VAU] [i ju'e {CU <brode VAU>}])=
=20
{brodi ra noi broda ku'o i ju'e brode}
([CU {brodi <ra (=C2=B9noi [CU {broda VAU}] ku'o=C2=B9)> VAU}] [i ju'e {CU =
<brode=20
VAU>}])=20

({brodi da} is required here because this {ju'e} connects two sentences,=20
not a fragment and a sentence. It might be allowed in the future version of=
=20
zantufa, though not yet decided.)


2. sentences between {tu'e ... tu'u}:

{nu tu'e broda i brode tu'u}
(CU [nu {tu'e <(=C2=B9CU [broda VAU]=C2=B9) (=C2=B9i [CU {brode VAU}]=C2=B9=
)> tu'u} KEI] VAU)=20


3. sentences connected with forethought connective:

{nu ju'e gi broda gi brode gi brodi gi brodo gi brodu}
(CU [nu {CU <(=C2=B9ju'e gi=C2=B9) broda (=C2=B9[gi brode] [gi brodi] [gi b=
rodo] [gi=20
brodu]=C2=B9) GIhI> VAU} KEI] VAU)=20

(Forethought connectives of la zantufa-0.2 can connect more than three=20
"statements (not only sentences)", and {gi'i} is used as the elidible=20
terminator GIhI, not as GIhA. See=20
http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_jonma%27o#lo_li.27erla.27i_jonma.27o
for more info.)

As 1 is allowed, your solution #1 is unnecessary, and ma'oi JUhEI in that=
=20
usage will never implemented to la zantufa.=20

=20

> And bonus official-Lojban solution #3, with an experimental shorthand tha=
t=20
> doesn't require new grammar: {tu'a la'e lu broda .i brode li'u}, with=20
> {tu'ai} (selma'o LU) being shorthand for {tu'a la'e lu}. Useful, but may =
be=20
> semantically vague, given lack of LO NU qualification, and {tu'a} possibl=
y=20
> implying missing information.
>
> Bonus problem: A related problem is how to make several sentences share a=
=20
> sumtcita-term. e.g: *{ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e kei tu'e lo zabna =
cu=20
> fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u}. {ju'e...gi} also works here, but retain=
s=20
> the chaining problem, while I don't know if any of the other listed=20
> solutions work.
>


Use {zo'u}:

{ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e zo'u tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla=
=20
cu fasnu tu'u}

It is parsed even by the official parser:

([{ca <lo (=C2=B9nu [mi {CU <stuvi'e (=C2=B2le sralygu'e KU=C2=B2) VAU>}] K=
EI=C2=B9) KU>} zo'u]=20
[tu'e {<(=C2=B9lo zabna KU=C2=B9) (=C2=B9cu [fasnu VAU]=C2=B9)> <i (=C2=B9l=
o mabla KU=C2=B9) (=C2=B9cu [fasnu=20
VAU]=C2=B9)>} tu'u])=20

zo'u-clause spans over a statement, that is to say, sentences connected=20
with {i JA/JOI}, {i (tag) bo}, {JOI/tag gi ... gi ...} or {GA ... gi ...}.=
=20
These connectives can be used instead of {tu'e ... tu'u} in many cases. For=
=20
example,

{ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e zo'u lo zabna cu fasnu .ibo lo mabla cu=
=20
fasnu}

is parsed by the official parser as follows:

([{ca <lo (=C2=B9nu [{mi CU} {stuvi'e <le sralygu'e KU> VAU}] KEI=C2=B9) KU=
>} zo'u]=20
[{<lo zabna KU> cu} {fasnu VAU}] [i bo {lo mabla KU} cu] [fasnu VAU])=20

=20

--=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.

------=_Part_3223_1914096933.1436945354630
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>Le mercredi 15 juillet 2015 04:26:50 UTC, Spheniscine (la zipcpi) a=
 =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;marg=
in-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"=
ltr">One problem that crops up now and then concerns how to include more th=
an one bridi within a NU clause. An example is my translation of Deuteronom=
y 8:12~14, which I have rendered:<div><br></div><div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-=
left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">.i te=
zu&#39;ebo rivbi va&#39;o lo nu do mo&#39;u citka jebo cu tolxagji je cu zb=
asu lo zabna zdani je cu xabju ri<br>ju&#39;ei loi cagda&#39;u be do ferti =
se panzi ju&#39;ei loi rijno joi loi solji vu&#39;o po do zei&#39;a sormei =
ju&#39;ei loi ro se ponse be do zei&#39;asai sormei kei<br>lo nu lo menli b=
e do co&#39;a se&#39;ijgi ju&#39;ei do tolmo&#39;i tu&#39;a la .iauex. ku n=
oi cevni do je noi vimcu do la .misr. ku no&#39;u le tutra pe lo ka bapse&#=
39;u</blockquote><div><br></div><div>(note, uses simplified connectives, th=
e experimental tag {zei&#39;a} which is basically {fi&#39;o te zenba}: {zei=
&#39;a sormei} means &quot;increasingly many&quot; / &quot;to increase in n=
umber&quot;, and {ju&#39;ei}, which shall be discussed. Yes, I&#39;m pretty=
 terrible with abusing experimental constructs.)</div></div><div><br></div>=
<div>There are several solutions:</div><div>official-Lojban solution #1: us=
e {ju&#39;e ... gi ...}. Requires forethought, and only takes two bridi. Ch=
aining them to allow more is impractical.</div><div><br></div><div>official=
-Lojban solution #2: close each NU clause then join it to a new abstractor =
sumti. e.g. {lo nu broda kei jo&#39;u lo nu brode}. Pretty wordy.</div><div=
><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>If you nee=
d a structure similar to your translation above, official-Lojban solution #=
2 must be rather {lo nu broda kei ju&#39;e nu brode}.</div><div><br></div><=
div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin=
-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"lt=
r"><div></div><div>experimental-grammar solution #1: {ju&#39;ei}; essential=
ly acts like a tight-scope {.i} that doesn&#39;t close sub-clauses. {lo nu =
broda ju&#39;ei brode}. Has the advantage of not requiring forethought, but=
 has the disadvantage of not automatically closing any bridi tails; if one =
of your abstraction-bridi happens to contain a lot of nested NU or POI, the=
y must be closed manually.</div><div><br></div><div>experimental-grammar so=
lution #2: Allow {tu&#39;e...tu&#39;u} to act as a single bridi in NU claus=
es: {lo nu tu&#39;e broda .i brode tu&#39;u}. Does require forethought, but=
 gives a new &quot;level zero&quot; for {.i} to automatically reset to unti=
l closed by {tu&#39;u}.</div><div><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></d=
iv><div><div><br></div><div>La zantufa-0.2 ( http://guskant.github.io/gerna=
_cipra/zantufa-0.2.html ) allows a full statement in noi-clause or nu-claus=
e. It means the following texts are parsed by la zantufa-0.2 as follows:</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>1. sentences connected with {i JOI} or {i (tag) bo}:=
</div><div><br></div><div>{nu broda i ju&#39;e brode}</div><div><span class=
=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>(CU [nu {&lt;CU (=C2=
=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)&gt; &lt;i ju&#39;e (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)&gt;} KE=
I] VAU)=C2=A0</div><div>{nu broda i bo brode}</div><div><span class=3D"Appl=
e-tab-span" style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>(CU [nu {&lt;CU (=C2=B9broda =
VAU=C2=B9)&gt; &lt;i bo (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)&gt;} KEI] VAU)=C2=A0</=
div><div>{nu broda i ba bo brode}</div><div><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" =
style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>(CU [nu {&lt;CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)&g=
t; &lt;i ba bo (=C2=B9CU [brode VAU]=C2=B9)&gt;} KEI] VAU)=C2=A0</div><div>=
<br></div><div>Use KEI or KUhO to cut the statement:</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>{nu broda kei i ju&#39;e brode}</div><div><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span"=
 style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>([CU {nu &lt;CU (=C2=B9broda VAU=C2=B9)&=
gt; kei} VAU] [i ju&#39;e {CU &lt;brode VAU&gt;}])=C2=A0</div><div>{brodi r=
a noi broda ku&#39;o i ju&#39;e brode}</div><div><span class=3D"Apple-tab-s=
pan" style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>([CU {brodi &lt;ra (=C2=B9noi [CU {b=
roda VAU}] ku&#39;o=C2=B9)&gt; VAU}] [i ju&#39;e {CU &lt;brode VAU&gt;}])=
=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>({brodi da} is required here because this {=
ju&#39;e} connects two sentences, not a fragment and a sentence. It might b=
e allowed in the future version of zantufa, though not yet decided.)</div><=
div><br></div><div><br></div><div>2. sentences between {tu&#39;e ... tu&#39=
;u}:</div><div><br></div><div>{nu tu&#39;e broda i brode tu&#39;u}</div><di=
v><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>(CU [nu =
{tu&#39;e &lt;(=C2=B9CU [broda VAU]=C2=B9) (=C2=B9i [CU {brode VAU}]=C2=B9)=
&gt; tu&#39;u} KEI] VAU)=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>3. s=
entences connected with forethought connective:</div><div><br></div><div>{n=
u ju&#39;e gi broda gi brode gi brodi gi brodo gi brodu}</div><div><span cl=
ass=3D"Apple-tab-span" style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>(CU [nu {CU &lt;(=
=C2=B9ju&#39;e gi=C2=B9) broda (=C2=B9[gi brode] [gi brodi] [gi brodo] [gi =
brodu]=C2=B9) GIhI&gt; VAU} KEI] VAU)=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>(Foret=
hought connectives of la zantufa-0.2 can connect more than three &quot;stat=
ements (not only sentences)&quot;, and {gi&#39;i} is used as the elidible t=
erminator GIhI, not as GIhA. See=C2=A0</div><div>http://mw.lojban.org/papri=
/zantufa_jonma%27o#lo_li.27erla.27i_jonma.27o</div><div>for more info.)</di=
v><div><br></div><div>As 1 is allowed, your solution #1 is unnecessary, and=
 ma&#39;oi JUhEI in that usage will never implemented to la zantufa.=C2=A0<=
/div><div><br></div></div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding=
-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div></div><div>And bonus official-Lojban sol=
ution #3, with an experimental shorthand that doesn&#39;t require new gramm=
ar: {tu&#39;a la&#39;e lu broda .i brode li&#39;u}, with {tu&#39;ai} (selma=
&#39;o LU) being shorthand for {tu&#39;a la&#39;e lu}. Useful, but may be s=
emantically vague, given lack of LO NU qualification, and {tu&#39;a} possib=
ly implying missing information.</div><div><br></div><div>Bonus problem: A =
related problem is how to make several sentences share a sumtcita-term. e.g=
: *{ca lo nu mi stuvi&#39;e le sralygu&#39;e kei tu&#39;e lo zabna cu fasnu=
 .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu&#39;u}. {ju&#39;e...gi} also works here, but retai=
ns the chaining problem, while I don&#39;t know if any of the other listed =
solutions work.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>=
<br></div><div>Use {zo&#39;u}:</div><div><br></div><div>{ca lo nu mi stuvi&=
#39;e le sralygu&#39;e zo&#39;u tu&#39;e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu f=
asnu tu&#39;u}</div><div><br></div><div>It is parsed even by the official p=
arser:</div><div><br></div><div>([{ca &lt;lo (=C2=B9nu [mi {CU &lt;stuvi=
9;e (=C2=B2le sralygu&#39;e KU=C2=B2) VAU&gt;}] KEI=C2=B9) KU&gt;} zo&#39;u=
] [tu&#39;e {&lt;(=C2=B9lo zabna KU=C2=B9) (=C2=B9cu [fasnu VAU]=C2=B9)&gt;=
 &lt;i (=C2=B9lo mabla KU=C2=B9) (=C2=B9cu [fasnu VAU]=C2=B9)&gt;} tu&#39;u=
])=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>zo&#39;u-clause spans over a statement, t=
hat is to say, sentences connected with {i JA/JOI}, {i (tag) bo}, {JOI/tag =
gi ... gi ...} or {GA ... gi ...}. These connectives can be used instead of=
 {tu&#39;e ... tu&#39;u} in many cases. For example,</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>{ca lo nu mi stuvi&#39;e le sralygu&#39;e zo&#39;u lo zabna cu fasnu .ib=
o lo mabla cu fasnu}</div><div><br></div><div>is parsed by the official par=
ser as follows:</div><div><br></div><div>([{ca &lt;lo (=C2=B9nu [{mi CU} {s=
tuvi&#39;e &lt;le sralygu&#39;e KU&gt; VAU}] KEI=C2=B9) KU&gt;} zo&#39;u] [=
{&lt;lo zabna KU&gt; cu} {fasnu VAU}] [i bo {lo mabla KU} cu] [fasnu VAU])=
=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0</div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_3223_1914096933.1436945354630--
------=_Part_3222_887273112.1436945354629--