From lojban+bncCK30vq5WELaWt-YEGgTLUx2X@googlegroups.com Sun Oct 31 13:02:18 2010 Received: from mail-pz0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCe6S-0006C7-OB; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:02:17 -0700 Received: by pzk6 with SMTP id 6sf167216pzk.16 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:02:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:date:from:to:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-disposition; bh=fFghWeXTDpTZk/zFjq6Cqd1wzrwUzWVT2k/h+ZRWKZw=; b=ldCqfgxFBru4zjsTeB2gnyWrAgGiAMaGS2BoEwUVJ5F+y41kRCB7RTpK31KmuqROY+ 2624tWCVpEqFe/Lus/iri516XN3LbbKz39pZX+0IHAFWMjilyOnmCWQ+8gDLnxzHQ7f9 igTa6lyzjg5SutO050QGUdb+jXfDqK84DmZSE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-disposition; b=d/j2gz7YbCG2bPGZDLuAwWygslmOSkyR17vJb4IL2QqukIG3IQxpZzSUlV1B2JOtsC YsO4XQ40pjo7LNdp/O1OpocCf4i3mHxeqn4qdN2jeAQ1L0hNnIgRGBLpVWpUojHuIZeM 5oPJtkxlFWZT4E9iHhstgLNxe3QwkYvkWlpFg= Received: by 10.142.250.38 with SMTP id x38mr161818wfh.24.1288555318720; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.249.41 with SMTP id w41ls4750667wfh.1.p; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.1.16 with SMTP id d16mr2883600wfi.31.1288555318121; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.1.16 with SMTP id d16mr2883599wfi.31.1288555318072; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id y8si7819971wfj.1.2010.10.31.13.01.58; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.234; Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCe6H-0006B2-9T for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:57 -0700 Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 13:01:57 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] cu-alike for other situations Message-ID: <20101031200157.GD1105@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20101031173116.GX1105@digitalkingdom.org> <20101031195943.GR8367@nvg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101031195943.GR8367@nvg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Original-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 08:59:43PM +0100, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 10:31:17AM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > Something that I and some others have talked about on IRC a few > > times is "Wow, cu is pretty useful when deeply nested; wouldn't > > it be nice to have something like that that could work in other > > places besides before the selbri?". > > > > This turns out to be surprisingly tricky; many ideas have been > > shown to be unworkable. > > > > I think I might finally have something: mark FA as needing > > terminator closure before it. Example: > > > > mi denpa le nu do xruti fi le nu zutse > > > > vs. > > > > mi denpa le nu do xruti cu fi le nu zutse > > I don't understand what neither the problem nor the solution is. > Can you translate the second sentence into current Lojban, please? mi denpa le nu do xruti kei vau ku fi le nu zutse (yes, I know you don't need all three, but I certainly could come up with an example where you did need 3 terminaters) I wouldn't say it's a *problem*, just that something like this is a nice-to-have. -Robin -- http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.