[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bpfk] Grammar of letterals and numerals in {li}

Agreed, the biggest question for me (beyond whether this is a good idea at all, zo'o zo'o nai) is what changes would be made to the grammar of LI? Would it be able to take a pure-lerfu string, a pure-digit string, but not a mixture? Or would we leave LI alone but create two new gadri selma'o that take pure-lerfu and pure-digit, respectively?

mu'o mi'e durkavore

On June 2, 2015 at 5:34:15 AM, Gleki Arxokuna (gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com) wrote:

Namely, that mixed lerfu/number strings should be banned.

xorxe's vision quoted at the end of this message.

2015-05-31 20:51 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:


On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Spheniscine (la zipcpi) <spheniscine@gmail.com> wrote:
I've not heard of that proposal. Wouldn't that just break all uses of {xy pa} when talking about the definitions of words? 

Those are "xy xi pa".

The contexts where we don't want digits and lerfu to mix (e.g. ".abu za'u re'u cusku", "by re mei", "lo re bolci zo'u pa by xunre .i je pa by blanu", "xy xi pa dunda xy xi re xy xi ci" etc. are much much more common than the need for mixed strings, and having to use "boi" for those is a pain.

So they are to be currently:
abu boi za'u re'u cusku 
i by boi re mei 
i lo re bolci zo'u pa boi by xunre 
.i je pa boi by blanu 
i xy xi pa dunda xy xi re boi xy xi ci 

I can agree that it can be a pain so this proposal may sound reasonable.

Besides, {me'o} still works, paralleling the use of strings for entry of ISO dates in programming languages. I just prefer {li} because
  • It's shorter
  • Dates and periods technically *are* numbers in a certain sense; arithmetic can be performed on them, despite the fact that in some ways they don't act like real-numbers, due to the varying length of months and years.
"me'o" and "li" are in the same selma'o, so the issue is the same for both.

I can't agree with changing anything within {li}, however. {li} is for mekso which is a special subset of Lojban with its own grammar.

{by} as a anaphorical marker and {by} within {li} are two different entities.
Terminating {li} with {boi} or {lo'o} isn't that hard IMO.

But how would "(n+1.3)^(3.15*r^2)" be expressed under this new xorxe's proposal then?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.