From cowan@MAGPIE.LL.PBS.ORG  Mon Aug  2 18:56:38 1993
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 2 Aug 1993 18:56:37 -0400
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 3880; Mon, 02 Aug 93 18:55:30 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with
 BSMTP id 7756; Mon, 02 Aug 93 18:56:53 EDT
Date:         Mon, 2 Aug 1993 18:48:41 -0400
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@MAGPIE.LL.PBS.ORG>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: John Cowan <cowan@MAGPIE.LL.PBS.ORG>
Subject:      Re: TECH: query on zoi & laho terminators
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Erik Rauch <erikr@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <9308022108.AA25831@nycenet.nycenet.edu> from "Mr Andrew Rosta"
              at Aug 2, 93 10:04:31 pm
Status: RO
X-Status: 
Message-ID: <BAnX5t_KkBK.A.gYH.Yy0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

>
la kolin. cusku di'e

> > I believe the terminator is required to be a lojban word, and must
> > be set off from the text by lojban pause eather end. (Since
> > people usually use lerfu or names, the closing terminator
> > is normally followed by a pause too, but that's not part of
> > the rule).

la .and. cusku di'e

> My understanding is that zoi or laho is followed by any legal
> lojban syllable, & that this syllable acts as the terminator.
> I think I got this from John Cowan, & was so impressed at
> its ingenuity that I inceived it into my own language, discarding
> the previous method for dealing with the same problem.

Colin is right and And is wrong this time.  The delimiter is a word, not
a syllable, and must follow the rules for Lojban words.  So "ma." is fine,
and so is "la'o", but "tsy." is not usable.  Of course, the word need not
have any meaning; it need merely be morphologically valid.

This set of rules allows you, with a little thought, to quote English text
which itself contains Lojban text:

        la .and. cusku zoi tsulu. Colin said, "mi'e kolin." .tsulu

where "tsulu" is morphologically valid, but is a meaningless gismu and so
not likely to occur in Lojban-within-English-within-Lojban, unless of course
the 2nd-order Lojban text itself contains a 2nd-order English text, in
which case......