From cowan@ccil.org Tue May 04 05:27:41 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 62249 invoked from network); 4 May 2004 12:27:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 May 2004 12:27:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 May 2004 12:27:40 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BKz3H-0008Rd-Ja; Tue, 04 May 2004 08:29:35 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 08:29:35 -0400 To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: <20040504122935.GF3004@ccil.org> References: <20040504082442.GT14939@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040504082442.GT14939@digitalkingdom.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 192.190.237.100 From: John Cowan Subject: Re: [lojban] ZOI and EOF X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=212516 X-Yahoo-Profile: johnwcowan X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 22104 Robin Lee Powell scripsit: > Should ZOI clauses close at end of input? I don't think so, but thought > I'd ask. Here's the relevant grammar.300 bit: An unclosed ZOI at physical end of input is a grammatical error. "fa'o" of course has no special meaning within a ZOI. > Interestingly, according to grammer.300, "la'o" needs no special > proccessing. I'm treating that as an obvious mistake, though. Evidently the comments didn't get updated. -- A witness cannot give evidence of his John Cowan age unless he can remember being born. jcowan@reutershealth.com --Judge Blagden http://www.ccil.org/~cowan