Re: [bpfk] BPFK work

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> Actually, it would have to be fa'o lo zarci to be sure to end any prior text
> before starting the new one.

This is the first time I hear about that. I'm pretty sure that the
standard line until now was that anything after fa'o was to be
ignored. And this is from the old old times, since fa'o has not
received a lot of attention.

> But then for most practical purposes, .i or
> ni'o are good enough.

But they are not. The two texts ".i mi gleki" and ".i go'i ra'o"
cannot be concatenated into one text without loss of meaning. The
single text ".i mi gleki .i go'i ra'o" does not have the same meaning
as the exchange of texts ".i mi gleki", ".i go'i ra'o".

>"Back in the day" (makes me feel elderly to use that
> phrase), we thought that each exchange in formal Lojban conversation would
> generally involve starting with .i or ni'o (recognizing that informally it
> would usually be left out).

The use of initial .i/ni'o makes little difference to this issue.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.