From lojban+bncCK30vq5WEJGuvekEGgS_FAnk@googlegroups.com Thu Jan 13 11:48:55 2011 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PdTA9-0002Tm-GS; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:55 -0800 Received: by pwi2 with SMTP id 2sf239537pwi.16 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature: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; bh=NbNI9UmpMDbWUPMeqzm/cuCV+kc/oHGEGtnHZkhTlnQ=; b=JdXy5Ynj2Jt0O0kksbgK4pAJL+xu6nQy9Q0smx4HjOft8+BAXha2RmtzRAUU85UwZG wW5MqsT90e33tQnga6Ivz3Y4T9XAtC72qTMhVzHUnLcSLXhTWWtJ8c9HJpQQq6PUEVx0 bDv/OYQlVdxOZW4MxWF9N0yJ1i5PRbYGGcdls= 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=QfY2hP5bWQwszhdJ+35v/3wCL6wvgzIZAojMpH9CZhpGVCWJhu88TLKDOK3w/X+9BO x6NTicQt6HQB2bkIh8qmKorN0F4mrZXKeVEByaZ73RcWgel3IK89pwjqNr0OOERJ97s0 EE02UJKMp1y/C9Sr/OnI7BQZWOSXpgJrSfC5c= Received: by 10.142.133.17 with SMTP id g17mr72183wfd.32.1294948113738; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:33 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.121.31 with SMTP id t31ls2415066wfc.3.p; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.48.13 with SMTP id v13mr990949wfv.74.1294948111076; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.48.13 with SMTP id v13mr990948wfv.74.1294948111051; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m3si430988wfl.5.2011.01.13.11.48.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:30 -0800 (PST) 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 1PdT9q-0002Td-4T for lojban@googlegroups.com; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:48:30 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: Lojban List Subject: Re: [lojban] will you help me understand BAhE+BU? Message-ID: <20110113194830.GD2132@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20110113024007.GE1262@alice.local> <20110113193746.GB2132@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110113193746.GB2132@digitalkingdom.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 Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:37:46AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 07:40:07PM -0700, .alyn.post. wrote: > > I'm trying to make sense of various statements about Magic Words > > on the wiki: > > > > (BAhE, even though it can modify any word, is not a magic > > word, because it doesn't affect the function of the word it > > modifies)[1] > > I wonder what would happen if I simply declared by fiat that ba'e > is deprecated, and you should use ge'e or another UI instead > (since AFAICT they have exactly the same "meaning" (or, rather, > lack of meaning)), and in 2 years if no insurmountable problems > are found it'll be removed from the grammar? > > This strikes me as about the largest change I could make without > immediately being tossed out on my ass. -_- We'd need a za'e replacement too. Which doesn't seem hard. For what it's worth, the fact that BAhE performs inappropriate carnal acts on the PEG grammar actually isn't as important to me as it being basically a UI in how it's used, but with a totally different grammar from *everything else in the language*. The only other thing that works even remotely like BAhE is ZO. In and of itself this wouldn't be *so* bad, but in basically every semantic respect it works just like UI. It's awful. ZEI is also crazy-exceptional, but at least it's *useful*. There's nothing else you can replace ZEI with without making a new grammatical construct. But BAhE is *trivially* replaced with a couple of UI, with no loss of expressive power. It's just awful. -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.