Yes, in casual conversation, it's not necessary
to add an .i every time a speaker switches. It's more formal (and grammatically
correct) to do so, but in conversation amongst people (and not say, computers),
people will understand that you generally are starting new sentences, and not
continuing others.
--gejyspa
From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
[mailto:lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org] On
Behalf Of Vid Sintef
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 9:58 AM
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re:
the ".i" after "lu"
I understand Michael's
point.
However, some collections of text on www.lojban.org
show sentences without being separated by ".i".
The following is from "terpa lo tirxu":
A: doi patfu do terpa xu lo tirxu
B: na go'i
A: xu go'i lo cinfo
B: si'a na go'i
A: je'e .ija'o do terpa le mamta po'o
Is this omission of ".i" a permissive, casual application for an
aesthetic reason?
Or should it be avoided as is the case in Elmo's example?
On 5/18/07, Turniansky,
Michael [UNK] <MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com>
wrote:
Actually,
Elmo, your sentences came to me without any line breaks (due
to my mailer, no doubt), and demonstrated quite clearely that YOU needed
to add .i before the second and third instances of "la ranjit" in
order
to break them up, rgeardless of what ranjit is sying ;-)
--gejyspa
-----Original Message-----
From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
[mailto:lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org]
On Behalf Of Elmo Todurov
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 8:05 AM
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: the ".i" after "lu"
Very little. Theoretically one might talk in several short
sentence-parts,
like
la.ranjit.cusku lu mi crino li'u
la ranjit cisma
la ranjit cusku lu je cmalu gi'e xabju la.mars li'u
In this case the .i should be inserted there in the beginning of a new
sentence. On the other hand, common sense would suggest citing whole
sentences at once.
In short, stay on the safe side and use .i.