Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncCN673cmqFBCorM3lBBoEXPpJ3g@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1P5N2L-0004KX-Dw; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:54 -0700
Received: by ywo7 with SMTP id 7sf1433721ywo.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
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:received:x-vr-score
         :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:user-agent
         :x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=FujCsLFfHRSZfgbjqd+8w9Fa7J9c7fiTkTRG6bEl9io=;
        b=s5ct4Dii7WxbS2HIge+rNYsfH9l2/5x9zDiWvokxzQnP2NfrQuqJjl3m9mgDVSeUS+
         fa9dPALlBIawAJDlNpxlKUUrz8dBEmQW+IobDwqQ22hEWTtDT3UGypkvNwSfP9BT1/xq
         P+/Xv+6S5rT4htyvBStjIGDzEx/oBr/L/ufHA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-vr-score:x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score
         :message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to
         :subject:references:in-reply-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:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=YhBexRd/yYt2tQ9zBzz3LcEp1Y50rOHLw6qs01Gv59VGcGYFbGRxcqwcFI67GPltc3
         pzKzUWWeF1uRyi8HXFy3csR3GqbB9HlrYfQa4Gj42fxH4NVl+72DeJgVAJF9JHlVZx2m
         2jrQDbzHXreFAh/XA3PcGDqBxWpMBdLkOuVXo=
Received: by 10.151.63.26 with SMTP id q26mr532487ybk.58.1286821416879;
        Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.150.1.17 with SMTP id 17ls1398445yba.0.p; Mon, 11 Oct 2010
 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.50.7 with SMTP id x7mr1451399ybx.52.1286821416645;
        Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.50.7 with SMTP id x7mr1451397ybx.52.1286821416622;
        Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eastrmmtao105.cox.net (eastrmmtao105.cox.net [68.230.240.47])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id q8si3102800ybk.8.2010.10.11.11.23.36;
        Mon, 11 Oct 2010 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.47 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.240.47;
Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126])
          by eastrmmtao105.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP
          id <20101011182336.RUED14030.eastrmmtao105.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net>
          for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:23:36 -0400
Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([70.179.118.163])
	by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp
	id HWPb1f00D3Xcbvq02WPbwC; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:23:35 -0400
X-VR-Score: -100.00
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=z6CBhH0tHruS0FbwYG+vLjSarkX/HqbUMpkqCCzoucY=
 c=1 sm=1 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:17
 a=oUiLKEf7TBTSDSzCtqQA:9 a=ig7MlOvjOT0RT_F4UJvVJqzZpTUA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10
 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:117
X-CM-Score: 0.00
Message-ID: <4CB355E6.7020705@lojban.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 14:22:30 -0400
From: Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work
References: <AANLkTi=2R1tYqwGzuL1oLN448q-aB3BHEcB4Z9h+5FBs@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinFLROKSf7WLn3r82hHVLGUjTUx6VLG=MereADY@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTimU6eie6HXqfVYWCKEYxBEn=uvyRk+oRbsCSyGv@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTi=5rsT0HCwd+aO+Pyt-2r6Q06jxss0zk2e+B+LE@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTimVM9COtdvBy6oH66imQOmMWXbumv3GQjYw8JhG@mail.gmail.com>	<4CB2335F.7000606@lojban.org>	<AANLkTi=eC0yrzcPj8DLqRVK+dnzQgt+-diwO0aM7rrj-@mail.gmail.com>	<4CB253D0.1020806@lojban.org>	<AANLkTikDa_qf9vK0wEeu-LsGmby0dVg5Mc7aAsMOPCEy@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTim5UyGXXc5m0aBySDaUPCXYrBh=81fyRz3om19q@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikJs4ti8DLAJ7HyOrdSdK4yxdf2QTWffdGgLw=S@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTim7rNwE0jFa9vuNZoobFh0vpKt5wO9Gw7XAwpAc@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikbuZNVhZqs85t4WyWKYmLsxT4oY6a6i38Efakh@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinzdG4_by2tPeJfbSy0FPnZ0Nn9yro2NOUK-sB5@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTimvjq+8ax7eVhEzY8_d0b_gXuR3FqqTaipHBW7A@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=DbRXt5TBRnA4bGj6X4_F52yDGVqfMb_mWhZHL@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=DbRXt5TBRnA4bGj6X4_F52yDGVqfMb_mWhZHL@mail.gmail.com>
X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com:
 68.230.240.47 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain
 of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en_US>
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 1307

Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote:
> I'm still trying to figure out where the idea that starting your part
> of the conversation without an ".i" is somehow less than perfect
> Lojban.

I gave one source.  But the real source is that there is no formal=20
definition for "starting a new text" - only informal ones.

> No, apparently it's not from L4B. So where does this notion that
> conversations are single parsable units rather than exchange of
> parsable units come from?

There is no formally defined plural of parsable unit.  The moment you=20
claim to talk about multiple texts, you have gone beyond the formal=20
language definition.  The question is whether, and how, we wish to=20
extend the formal definition of Lojban beyond a single text.

>>So I agree with xorxes: we cannot assume a single text.
>>It simply wouldn't work.

So the formal grammar doesn't work when we go beyond a single speaker.=20
Especially when we look at actual usage.  No surprise.

lojbab

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg=
roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l=
ist?hl=3Den.