From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Sat Mar 6 22:58:11 2010 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list Date: Wed Nov 29 16:41:29 1995 From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE X1: BAI afterthought connectives X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: John Cowan Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Wed Nov 29 16:41:29 1995 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Message-ID: la djan cusku di'e > So what about allowing "stag BO" as a new kind of joik-bo, side by side > with the existing "joik BO" and "joik stag BO"? That would allow its use in > sumti, selbri, operands, and operators, but not elsewhere. YACC does not > complain. "i stag BO" is already allowed as sentence connective so it seems that they would be allowed everywhere that matters. I would be happy with that. (Of course, change X2 would have to include "GI stag BO" side by side with "GI joik BO" and "GI joik stag BO".) Any connection of NUs is pretty nonsensical anyway, and I don't care much for connection of tenses either. (It might be a good idea to eliminate those altogether.) Is there any other connection that would be missing? Jorge