From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Jun 19 16:11:01 2007 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 65696 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2007 23:10:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.67.34) by m46.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Jun 2007 23:10:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.5) by mta8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Jun 2007 23:10:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 29649 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2007 23:08:47 -0000 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 19 Jun 2007 23:08:46 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I0moW-0008Mb-71 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:08:45 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I0mo1-0008LM-4B; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:08:15 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:07:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I0mmz-0008Kz-8V for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:07:09 -0700 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I0mmy-0008Ks-IH for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:07:08 -0700 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:07:08 -0700 Message-ID: <20070619230708.GL10939@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: <200706192243.l5JMh3BK017187@express.cec.wustl.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200706192243.l5JMh3BK017187@express.cec.wustl.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-archive-position: 13741 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Score-Int: 1 X-Spam-Bar: / To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 69.17.117.5 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell Reply-To: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Founders: sei restriction motivation? X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=mgU_65c0wcdPJemU9RGelHuLlLTbuKKJW5hcNjDOQYPabCcBfQ X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 28205 Yeah, I didn't realize that the point was that you mostly don't have to say "se'u". Question withdrawn. -Robin On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 06:43:00PM -0400, adam@wustl.edu wrote: > I always thought it was a deliberate decision, not a grammar > limitation. What's the difference between your modified (trailing > sumti accepting) SEI/SEhU and TO/TOI? Further, any change would > be non-backwards compatable, reparsing {sei la .alis. cusku mi > gleki} like {sei la .alis. cusku be mi se'u gleki} instead of {sei > la .alis. cusku se'u mi gleki}. Unless I'm completely > misunderstanding your question. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robin Lee Powell > Subj: [lojban] Founders: sei restriction motivation? > Date: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:46 pm > Size: 554 bytes > To: lojban-list@lojban.org > > > Is there any reason for the "cmavo in sei...se'u must be linked by > be/bei/be'o" restriction? Besides computer grammar issues, I mean. -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.