Message-Id: <199511211831.NAA21355@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Tue, 21 Nov 1995 18:15:49 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: vuo
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR

John:
> > On the subject of {vuo}, is there a way to get:
> >   by e [dy e gy vou ne zy]
> The brackets for sumti connection are not ke/ke'e, but LAhE/lu'u.
> In the beginning, there was only lu'i/lu'u, and they were
> pure brackets and without semantic content.  Then they became
> transmogrified into set/mass/individual converters, as a result of my
> being misled by the incautious word "set" in the definition of lu'i.
> Then LUhI and LAhE got their grammar merged under the name of LAhE.
> So to say what you want you need
>        by .e lu'a dy .e gy. lu'u ne zy.
> assuming, that is, that your variables really do refer to individuals
> and not masses or sets, to avoid unwanted conversions.

But surely one gardenpaths on that. That is, you'd parse it as

   by e [lua dy] e gy

until you hit {luu}, and then I guess you'd have to backtrack.
Or is there some quirk of the grammar of LUhU that says it's not
elidable before a sumti connective, so that if you want [lua dy] then
you'd have to say:

   by e lua dy luu e gy

? And the terminators are not elidable in

   by e lua lae dy luu e gy luu ne zy

?  ---coo, mie and