From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Sun Mar 28 18:03:47 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 28 Mar 2004 18:03:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.30) id 1B7m7q-0001rx-1L for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2004 18:03:42 -0800 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 18:03:42 -0800 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Official Parser confused about pe'e and ce'e Message-ID: <20040329020342.GK6569@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <20040328085608.GO18619@digitalkingdom.org> <20040329013844.GB18719@ccil.org> <20040329014336.GI6569@digitalkingdom.org> <20040329014924.GE18719@ccil.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040329014924.GE18719@ccil.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 7382 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 08:49:24PM -0500, John Cowan wrote: > Robin Lee Powell scripsit: > > > Even in the latter case, I still would *very* much appreciate > > guidance for things like "le broda .ije broda". > > Okay. IMHO, ijeks/ijoiks aren't appropriate between a full bridi like > "broda" and a fragment like "le broda". "le broda" doesn't assert > anything, so logically or non-logically combining it with an actual > claim makes little sense. OK. Is that also what the techfixes and such say should be the case? -Robin -- Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all from running out and eating all the cookies." -- Eliezer Yudkowsky http://www.lojban.org/ *** .i cimo'o prali .ui