From lojbab@lojban.org Sun Sep 30 17:54:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 1 Oct 2001 00:54:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 28409 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2001 00:54:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Oct 2001 00:54:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-5.cais.net) (205.252.14.75) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Oct 2001 00:54:42 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (50.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.50]) by stmpy-5.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f910sfd56694 for ; Sun, 30 Sep 2001 20:54:41 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010930204315.00a9cf00@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 20:51:43 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: The Pleasures of goi (was: zipf computations & experimental cmavo In-Reply-To: <9p75of+gso@eGroups.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010930051622.00d90d50@pop.cais.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 11217 At 01:12 PM 9/30/01 +0000, mark@kli.org wrote: >Indeed. I therefore propose that ''da'o'' be used to specify >assymetry in ''goi'' and ''cei'' assignments. Whichever element is >da'o-ed is considered to be cleared out and overwritten by the new >value. This may well mean redefining ''da'o'', which I think >currently means "undefine everything." For that meaning, I propose >''da'oda'o''. DAhO has the same grammar as UI, near enough, so it >can be considered to attach to things. ''da'o'' outside of goi/cei >will retain the meaning of undefining whatever it's attached to. >This, I think, is a pretty small change, not really munging baseline >badly, and certainly it accords with grammar. And I think it neatly >solves several problems at once. ''--mi'e mark'' > >I second. DAhO is another example of a selma'o that should not >exist. Apparently the only difference with UI is that ''da'onai'' is >not allowed, but it has a very useful meaning: when you want to >emphasize that you are __not__ undefining something. So, whenever it >is pertinent, ''da'o'' should be moved to UI. --mi'e [xorxes] > >(end of quoting) > >What think you, And et al? I agree (for once %^). da'o should have been UI. If so, then you could do a single unbinding using da'oru'e (this would be as legal now as da'oda'o, but given the parser algorithm specified in the grammar description, in theory the da'o disappears before the ru'e is applied; I doubt that the parser actually cares though). I don't support a baseline change, of course, but there seems to be enough material in the language to manage what needs to be said. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org