Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HGcR3-0003Hy-5H for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:41 -0800 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.190]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HGcQw-0003Hp-BX for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:40 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c31so3883301nfb for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:32 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=PtGo4ZkMGa5uQNDgZB+Mg+XG3MoRs1Z+cGu27gm9xtkzxnmdE671dM1/HSYNv2wCOZN97e6EFDdQvkwQXcbR+2jn8wY5NrpdQw53BS3M3dIwreL/TY/2ULQYnghGdhOHKIZ6skctXwemvuLnQ8GGK8RPZkB56QsztPkWIqOptI4= Received: by 10.82.186.5 with SMTP id j5mr10153385buf.1171291532022; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.48.219.6 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:45:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <23dc8c770702120645p3d547d3fyc56f98405c29c293@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:45:31 +0000 From: "Karl Naylor" To: Lojban-beginners Subject: [lojban-beginners] bo MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: -25 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 4035 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: karl.org@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 837 Having read through Lojban for Beginners and up to Chapter 10 of the Reference Grammar, I'm getting increasingly frustrated with 'bo'. I gather that there must be some kind of unified theory of 'bo' which explains all its behaviours, otherwise we'd use different words for the (apparently) different applications of 'bo'. As I understand it, in tanru it binds the two nearest brivla (or bracketed groups of brivla). Between sentences it makes the preceding connective connect the two sentences. When used this way, it causes its connective to swallow up the whole following sentence, not just a single sumti. Also it apparently reverses the meaning of tenses when used between sentences. My problem is that I don't see why these apparently disparate effects all follow from the same word. Is there any help to be found on this?