From lojban+bncCK30vq5WEOrumewEGgQB4Mi1@googlegroups.com Sun Mar 20 14:54:01 2011 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q1QZS-0003sK-5o; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:54:01 -0700 Received: by pwi1 with SMTP id 1sf1247449pwi.16 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:52 -0700 (PDT) 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:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-disposition; bh=vjnJgJ3VlwspvPiGkps1aEOqonS/c1Fvsvz1IhQm5tA=; b=yQh63J+CwQtPNEoSh4GAoRFkBCjcWOnc36q2F2NABgtMK0SHHBBuvTDQ1//DVk1jko naxLepTG5iPCz4W7z1Ah617LhqfOpf3SVYVd/ugtiZrDqk9AN2EqXVwpL/KmwP5Zc9k5 piaq9P1rHb0iICuqv2XE19Y7mPEsCmT4HgPPI= 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-disposition; b=kVq+bZor8ll4CiCWpVs3HiwdKK9YPLWQg1iUUnwtDOYv5jO+lDJ83SfUqmIePpKQsn ZH8b0A2hPshB0nbaRi60Zwa8aG4VCHvkxaEFPtZHoZdc1br91LDHdP3zC2NCQQnguOzp UZx24xEgX2A6a/1vWbMI3j0HV+/NhWnYOLIbc= Received: by 10.142.231.14 with SMTP id d14mr195138wfh.46.1300658026521; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:46 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.143.87.9 with SMTP id p9ls1938484wfl.1.p; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.87.7 with SMTP id p7mr942806wfl.42.1300658025207; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.87.7 with SMTP id p7mr942805wfl.42.1300658025182; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 28si4900901wfb.6.2011.03.20.14.53.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:44 -0700 (PDT) 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 1Q1QZD-0003sE-Tj for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:44 -0700 Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:53:43 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Anyone remember what lerfu strings are actually *for*? Message-ID: <20110320215343.GY17248@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20110319191714.GO17248@digitalkingdom.org> <201103192012.57005.phma@phma.optus.nu> <20110320001947.GR17248@digitalkingdom.org> <201103192252.36066.phma@phma.optus.nu> <20110320025539.GU17248@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 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 Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 09:31:59AM -0400, Ian Johnson wrote: > Only problem with this argument is that afaict it winds up > requiring a lot of {bu} when it requires any (Pierre's example > winds up being {re bu bi bu .abu}), whereas {panzi be ny ci mei} > is fixed by just one terminator. I just want to point out that while {panzi be ny ci mei} is a fairly degenerate example, this is actually quite a common issue. The following is na gendra, for example: vy ci nimre cu dunda mi because "vy ci" is taken as a pro-sumti. If that doesn't surprise you at first glance, you've internalized the grammar a lot better than I have (or anyone else I know; people screw this up pretty regularily, when it comes up). -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.