From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Jun 02 10:47:48 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 02 Jun 2004 10:47:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BVZq0-0006SG-54 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2004 10:47:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:47:40 -0700 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Grammar: li paxa se nanca Message-ID: <20040602174740.GS818@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 8034 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 Both jbofihe and the official parser choke on "li paxa se nanca" but are fine with "li paxa nanca". Does anyone know why? Note that the official parser *appears* to be happy with the first form, but it actually drops the "se" in its output. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. "Many philosophical problems are caused by such things as the simple inability to shut up." -- David Stove, liberally paraphrased. http://www.lojban.org/ *** loi pimlu na srana .i ti rokci morsi