From lojban+bncCOib25n_BhDAmLbqBBoENxgfsg@googlegroups.com Sat Feb 05 09:43:43 2011 Received: from mail-yi0-f61.google.com ([209.85.218.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PlmAd-0006cw-U7; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:43 -0800 Received: by yia27 with SMTP id 27sf2236619yia.16 for ; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version :in-reply-to:references: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=N9i4WsJm0cQ7C04f5QVekyXMvEj6rScmIDvLPcbzDQY=; b=iHRQx3sjGR8RvHOao0fyKj8+5EaHurj4FosbKGulpvUqwauPI3qEPulWO4nv5SOt/i sff2BMnE/Gd95TDYhApNSFp+Sdxi9Skzp7B0Aks6kKBXdqNyfofCrxAq/jHO+jk1O5w6 JgYVJLsG+LyVNEpwrxNsNxvtjDR91TwwleGsM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references: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=6XvQKBbCvJ353NnVZLffHBCuXNRtKTrpWtYZtxiyBOKd32dy54JNmpo9kIDiewnwXp TZTzq3PqoI1aXSJ0zXoDsIP0CHvViB3+qLhacK7PBq3leygp0eKRTjJ8ciuW+xdufabf NUagsQsDIchAzytixm9UlN7U6AoSyNTZfyXvs= Received: by 10.236.109.9 with SMTP id r9mr15955yhg.29.1296927808437; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:28 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.57.97 with SMTP id b33ls1615842ibh.0.p; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.166.72 with SMTP id n8mr497567icy.78.1296927807565; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.166.72 with SMTP id n8mr497566icy.78.1296927807510; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iy0-f180.google.com (mail-iy0-f180.google.com [209.85.210.180]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gf5si299430icb.6.2011.02.05.09.43.26 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:26 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.180; Received: by mail-iy0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 42so199871iyh.11 for ; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.213.132 with SMTP id gw4mr15956057icb.413.1296927806313; Sat, 05 Feb 2011 09:43:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.166.202 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Feb 2011 09:43:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20110205070102.GI8388@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:43:26 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Error in DAG-CLL? 4.6 From: Alex Rozenshteyn To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@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=20cf3056425331d76a049b8c8969 --20cf3056425331d76a049b8c8969 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you for explaining the reasoning. 2011/2/5 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Alex Rozenshteyn > wrote: > > > > Also, how difficult would it be in the parser to give {bu} precedence? > > Not very difficult, but why should "bu" have precedence over "zei"? > They both have very similar functions, they take words from any word > class and turn them into a phrase that behaves almost like a word of > classes BY and BRIVLA respectively. > > > I > > feel wrong claiming that both {.abu} and {xy} are letterals if they don= 't > > behave the same way. Just my two cents. > > But it would be just as wrong to claim that "na'e zei .a" and > "pavyseljirna" are both lujvo if they don't behave the same way (when > followed by BU, for example). > > The way to turn the three words na'e + .a + bu into a lujvo is: "na'e > zei .a zei bu" > > No matter what precedence rule you choose for magic words, you will > inevitably get odd results sometimes, so you might as well choose a > very simple precedence rule like "first come first served" so you > don't have to start deciding whether bu trumps zei, or zei trumps zo, > or zo trumps si, or si trumps zoi, or what. Just process them always > as they come. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > 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=3Den. > > --=20 Alex R --=20 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. --20cf3056425331d76a049b8c8969 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you for explaining the reasoning.

2= 011/2/5 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Alex Rozenshteyn <rpglover64@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also, how difficult would it be in the parser to give {bu} precedence?=

Not very difficult, but why should "bu" have precedence ove= r "zei"?
They both have very similar functions, they take words from any word
class and turn them into a phrase that behaves almost like a word of
classes BY and BRIVLA respectively.

> I
> feel wrong claiming that both {.abu} and {xy} are letterals if they do= n't
> behave the same way.=A0 Just my two cents.

But it would be just as wrong to claim that "na'e zei .a&quo= t; and
"pavyseljirna" are both lujvo if they don't behave the same w= ay (when
followed by BU, for example).

The way to turn the three words na'e + .a + bu into a lujvo is: "n= a'e
zei .a zei bu"

No matter what precedence rule you choose for magic words, you will
inevitably get odd results sometimes, so you might as well choose a
very simple precedence rule like "first come first served" so you=
don't have to start deciding whether bu trumps zei, or zei trumps zo, or zo trumps si, or si trumps zoi, or what. Just process them always
as they come.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

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




--
=A0=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Alex R

--
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.
--20cf3056425331d76a049b8c8969--