From lojban+bncCML0xpmUARD9iJLpBBoERbS_5Q@googlegroups.com Wed Jan 05 06:47:39 2011 Received: from mail-pv0-f189.google.com ([74.125.83.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PaUeE-0005XS-V7; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:39 -0800 Received: by pvh1 with SMTP id 1sf6261179pvh.16 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:29 -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=oxqi84Iuf7FiY8IhaDjUBrUYRb6V5sbqxPetDYywNqY=; b=k3JEuOk/5JsCG9+An3fiZl5DMpcMikCPYJVq5JidIqEJ2KC+NIjw/i+SverlSpwCZ/ yUOja2zEqoPdAI90ifn5M+6B+wYEfknTxKJdBqtVNQu6J3IBvcKnT6OMYTvLBRDB8fVb s5rWAJ4NArqd/BBRxqMKoe+hRqTje7EG7lZCM= 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=xaEjBTakRlJ+1k99PNaaQCCzU43Srq/GVKkkm3VHHJGZAH9iEwwpcWzOBzwTK2I0hW bPs5E5kj8ZJp85/fZPGI1Mb/EgARL/y0SGCLm6DTpHJmy+DRqRDdaHd2Uj/7ZVKjYbwn 2r7LUbs1NSK7uoJ3I4/AAJTBqfVrBEmkLwCLM= Received: by 10.142.250.2 with SMTP id x2mr1081286wfh.65.1294238845500; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:25 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.121.31 with SMTP id t31ls23687736wfc.3.p; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.192.21 with SMTP id p21mr17472284wff.55.1294238844532; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.192.21 with SMTP id p21mr17472281wff.55.1294238844497; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-px0-f176.google.com (mail-px0-f176.google.com [209.85.212.176]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id m3si24547574wfl.1.2011.01.05.06.47.23; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:23 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.176; Received: by pxi11 with SMTP id 11so3277840pxi.21 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.171.17 with SMTP id t17mr19106179wfe.88.1294238843369; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 06:47:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.103.17 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 06:47:23 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 09:47:23 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] tanru ordering and a cmavo proposal From: Ian Johnson To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.176 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@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=000e0cd1876a837a8b04991a76be --000e0cd1876a837a8b04991a76be Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 This proposal is about {co}. There are basically two orders of seltau, tertau, sumti-of-seltau, and sumti-of-tertau that are allowed. These are: [ST] S SS T ST. No {co} needed. [ST] T ST S SS. {co} needed. The following case came up on IRC last night and is not possible at the moment: [ST] T S SS ST The problem is that once you use {co}, any sumti you throw out there afterwards are SS automatically. In essence this is basically like being trapped in a NU, where all the sumti you say get sucked up into the NU until {kei} or something that forces it like {cu} comes up. Accordingly, why should {co} not have a terminator? Have a terminator like {co'ai}, and then you have equivalences like: ko'a broda co brode ko'e ko'i co'ai ko'o == ko'a brode be ko'e bei broda ko'i Formally: Proposal: {co'ai}. Terminator for {co}. When supplied, sumti that follow it are considered to be sumti of the tertau, rather than sumti of the seltau. My only issue that I haven't carefully looked over (this actually just came to mind) is how this interacts with multiple {co}. mu'o mi'e .latros. -- 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. --000e0cd1876a837a8b04991a76be Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This proposal is about {co}. There are basically two orders of seltau, tert= au, sumti-of-seltau, and sumti-of-tertau that are allowed. These are:
[S= T] S SS T ST. No {co} needed.
[ST] T ST S SS. {co} needed.

The fo= llowing case came up on IRC last night and is not possible at the moment: [ST] T S SS ST
The problem is that once you use {co}, any sumti you thro= w out there afterwards are SS automatically. In essence this is basically l= ike being trapped in a NU, where all the sumti you say get sucked up into t= he NU until {kei} or something that forces it like {cu} comes up. According= ly, why should {co} not have a terminator? Have a terminator like {co'a= i}, and then you have equivalences like:

ko'a broda co brode ko'e ko'i co'ai ko'o =3D=3D ko&= #39;a brode be ko'e bei broda ko'i

Formally:
Proposal: {c= o'ai}. Terminator for {co}. When supplied, sumti that follow it are con= sidered to be sumti of the tertau, rather than sumti of the seltau.

My only issue that I haven't carefully looked over (this actually j= ust came to mind) is how this interacts with multiple {co}.

mu'= o mi'e .latros.






--
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.
--000e0cd1876a837a8b04991a76be--