Seems odd, but OK. What does it mean joining two pr= edicates, as in your examples? that would seem to be 'je's job. And '= joi', aside from introducing the unspeakable notion of masses, is a differe= nt kind of combining, here perhaps almost intelligible (red joi blue for a = ball with stripes of a swirly pattern or something). It looks like 'joi' it= self could go in either slot. So maybe 'ce', too (though I'm not sure= what it means between predicates). 'je', on the other hand only goes= between predicates. If 'joi' is inspecific on joinees, the you do ne= ed to close the first term to show that it is terms, not predicates being j= oined.
But it all raises the question whether we use the sa= me connectives for C-sets and L-sets (alias plural references).

From: Ian = Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 1:51:58 PM
Subject: Re: Cake, Pie or Ice Cream? (w= as: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lojban] Re: Vot= e for the Future Global Language))

{ce} is JOI, so yeah you need the {ku}. How the hell {mi broda ce brode} di= ffers from {mi broda je brode} and {mi broda joi brode} is anyone's guess a= faik.

That reminds me, actually; why does the grammar refuse:
LE SELBRI JOI LE SELBRI
? Why can't JOI realize "left side is sumti, rig= ht side is sumti, so ku is implied on left side"? Does the grammar not have= enough lookahead, or something?

mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:30 PM, John E Clifford = <kali9putra@ya= hoo.com> wrote:

Being a little rusty in both areas here, I proceed in terror.&= nbsp; But it seems to me that 'ce' only joins noun phrases, so this needs t= he other two 'lo' at least. I don't know whether 'ce' also forces 'ku= ', though it seems it should. I'm also not sure about the 'jai' -- th= is doesn't seem to be raising a prepositional object to argument status, ma= inly because nothing here is a preposition.

Ooops! I forgot
4 How do we do the restricted choices: "= Which (at most) one do you want?" and so on. Can 'ma' be quantified?<= br>

From: Oleksii Melnyk <lamelnyk@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, January 7, 2011 11:42:53 AM
Subject: Re: Cake, Pie or = Ice Cream? (was: Re: Lojban is *NOT* broken! Stop saying that! (was Re: [lo= jban] Re: Vote for the Future Global Language))

2011/1/7 Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>
do djica tu'a ma noi cmima lo titnanba kuce lo nabypalne kuce = lo bisyladru

Is =ABma du lo titnanba ce nabypalne ce b= isyladru ku'a [jai] se djica [be do]=BB works, or we do need that number of= "kucelo"s?

--
mu'o mi'e lex

--
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@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.googl= e.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.