From sentto-44114-18389-1043459359-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Fri Jan 24 17:49:55 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:49:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.71]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.05) id 18cFSA-0007VP-01 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:49:50 -0800 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-18389-1043459359-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Jan 2003 01:49:19 -0000 X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 25 Jan 2003 01:49:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 52987 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2003 01:49:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Jan 2003 01:49:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao03.cox.net) (68.1.17.242) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Jan 2003 01:49:18 -0000 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030125014917.JPDY8666.lakemtao03.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:49:17 -0500 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030124203814.034d9ec0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 To: In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030124073902.03412760@pop.east.cox.net> From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 20:43:18 -0500 Subject: [lojban] Re: za'e "postnex" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3902 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list At 04:46 PM 1/24/03 +0000, And Rosta wrote: > > It may require some conventions (grammatical scope being undefined for > > afterthought structures). But predefined conventions are good, even when > > unofficial, in that they eliminate the need to glork from context. (this > > is not to say that >I< will always approve of them) > >Unofficial conventions that conflict with official ones must not be >countenanced except as part of an intentionally nonstandard dialect. There are no official conventions on the interpretation of metalinguistic bridi or parenthetical comments, on the scope of the di'u family of "text" references, to my knowledge. Indeed we explicitly expected that these would be used to establish special conventions that override the standards (the best example of this is the use of operator precedence marking to override the MEX parse groupings - the result of parsing will be a grammatical grouping but specifying precedence overrides interpretation in accordance with the grammatical parse) >The official interpretation of your examples is known, and should >not be subverted by unofficial conventions. The place for establishing >unofficial conventions in in the experimental cmavo, such as zo'au. Or in metalinguistic comments expressed solely in Lojban. -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/