[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Re: indicator attachment
- To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: indicator attachment
- From: "Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:49:19 -0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=jmPN+ZCpdGt3MM0trfdIozAwWI61m7GFg3H0/b++GRA=; b=Y3m2YJ4Jej/9z0GqmLZQ05mhGvIL3zJB8qMTKmXkzlv9K8HjXU/R/uASm5mxGOAuU1 Bq4W1UnGQ3ua27/ROn4MISUVp/QsMwIRFvZ9Uu7qkBxpjJe0uI6OSwohjnoHq4GfWoQ/ phG7O+pMZZgi8UBjDREjZ2RWo7/1l9uum77Tw=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=cRApj/MoAlQ7P26iR08NR73CRviML89WiX6qxqIY6h2seT8+54uWT9soz9I/vX3WBg d7KeJSwbQPdqNdsu2ZpOIqM71sGDw548XoQzQSoMnweWFBYRxNx5dbxjmzuq3IGquC2B yDG2youZmxSWpkNoGBGWrcz7NkA/GDIdOH3as=
- In-reply-to: <737b61f30806231825s228e2f7w45070561f8a0ed9e@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <737b61f30806231825s228e2f7w45070561f8a0ed9e@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
> More alice questions! Yay!
>
> The PEG groups {lahe dihu laha certu} as [{lahe (dihu laha)} <certu>].
> As I understand it, indictors like {la'a} do indeed attach to the word
> on their left.
Right.
> Does this mean that that sentence ought technically to
> be {lahe dihu certu laha}, or {laha lahe dihu certu}?
It depends what the intended meaning was. It could be that {la'a}
does modify {di'u}. x1 of {certu} is supposed to be a person, so
{la'e di'u} doesn't seem to make much sense there. If it was {jetnu}
instead of {certu}, the difference would be someting like:
la'a la'e di'u jetnu
"Probably that's true."
la'e di'u la'a jetnu
"It's probably that which is true."
>If my
> understanding is correct, then I don't need to change my parser to be
> less misleading. :)
The parser is doing the right thing. The sentence doesn't seem to make
sense with or without {la'a}.
mu'o mi'e xorxes