From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCB9avoBBoEt6zRWQ@googlegroups.com Thu Dec 16 21:52:18 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PTTEk-0003Ew-6B; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:18 -0800 Received: by gwj17 with SMTP id 17sf280470gwj.16 for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:07 -0800 (PST) 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:mime-version:received:received:date :message-id:subject:from:to: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; bh=DQz54sF7dXOJQGdxZo3DF+ElbFsUutOVxebqtf/ZoiY=; b=ZYEfi0I2y2HU/AEoW6BC9no/hmZ3GJ+jhN/XejNx/lgt4VLMzFZ9UTncdQDiwlt/2m mmdWYtqgUxVmoS7ZqADVAiIIUlx4d10p4VZZYRjzSk4jFQr1yI43QbojrXX0QeiknY8Q 4q/fOSKAV0HC3JO7HqW4x0hRlk8NZbjQ44Cyg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from :to: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; b=lFPJKPyZAcuYA8cdn72nsozllH+uwBcYyBkLyifdAALW2pxAFSg1qnkQRCRdylwcmw mL3fztCUlq0TTnUwD0BMUiH5nu0K+Ibx8AMkaLUdWb3T7fSF6nTm/Wp5SSKRHBs/2yCw gk7nKhSyxGowXGReWEJR4QNQoRb0WY9wEgYig= Received: by 10.101.125.16 with SMTP id c16mr14495ann.37.1292565121859; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:01 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.141.220 with SMTP id n28ls3273941ibu.0.p; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.15.203 with SMTP id l11mr197355iba.6.1292565120969; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.15.203 with SMTP id l11mr197354iba.6.1292565120950; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:52:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com (mail-iw0-f169.google.com [209.85.214.169]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id j25si165926ibb.0.2010.12.16.21.51.59; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:51:59 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.169; Received: by iwn40 with SMTP id 40so372661iwn.14 for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:51:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.35.75 with SMTP id o11mr404639ibd.12.1292565119815; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:51:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.19.199 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 21:51:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:51:59 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] go'i as "yes" From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com 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: multipart/alternative; boundary=000325579db2d0e038049794c473 --000325579db2d0e038049794c473 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 So someone in IRC was asking how to respond "yes" or "no" to a question in lojban and it got me thinking about a lack of knowledge on my part that has been bothering me for some time now. If you see the following: A: xu la .bob. zvati B: go'i You would interpret the {go'i} as {la .bob. zvati}. But if you see the following: A: ti'e la .bob. zvati B: go'i Would you read that as {me too} or {yes, you heard right. He is here}. What I'm getting at is, {go'i} clearly does not simply repeat all the words of the last bridi or else {xu do broda .i go'i} would expand to {xu do broda .i xu do broda}. So is it just discursives that get dropped? I think I remember hearing xorxes at one point say something like "go'i repeats the bridi and any left off places are defaulted to those of the previous bridi". But then, are discursives "left off but NOT defaulted to those of the previous bridi"? If I were writing a program to parse lojban, how should my parser deal with a piece of discourse that contained {go'i} if it wanted to expand everything? i.e. given the following bridi .i ti'e .u'i la .bob. noi lazni cu zvati to pe'i cinri toi ma How does {go'i} differ syntactically and semantically from {zo'e zvati zo'e} Sorry for the stupidly long email. mi'e cribe -- 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. --000325579db2d0e038049794c473 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So someone in IRC was asking how to respond "yes" or "no&quo= t; to a question in lojban and it got me thinking about a lack of knowledge= on my part that has been bothering me for some time now.

If you see the following:
A: =A0xu la .bob. zvati
= B: =A0go'i

You would interpret the {go'i} = as {la .bob. zvati}. =A0But if you see the following:
A: =A0ti= 9;e la .bob. zvati
B: =A0go'i

Would you read that as {me too= } or {yes, you heard right. =A0He is here}.

What I= 'm getting at is, {go'i} clearly does not simply repeat all the wor= ds of the last bridi or else {xu do broda .i go'i} would expand to {xu = do broda .i xu do broda}. =A0So is it just discursives that get dropped? = =A0I think I remember hearing xorxes at one point say something like "= go'i repeats the bridi and any left off places are defaulted to those o= f the previous bridi". =A0But then, are discursives "left off but= NOT defaulted to those of the previous bridi"?

If I were writing a program to parse lojban, how should= my parser deal with a piece of discourse that contained {go'i} if it w= anted to expand everything?

i.e. given the followi= ng bridi
.i ti'e .u'i la .bob. noi lazni cu zvati to pe'i cinri toi= ma
How does {go'i} differ syntactically and semantically fro= m {zo'e zvati zo'e}

Sorry for the stupidly= long email.

mi'e cribe

--
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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--000325579db2d0e038049794c473--