[lojban-beginners] Re: zo za'u jo'u zo me'i

[Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com>]

de'i li 10 pi'e 06 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Luke Bergen .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> Is that true xorxes?  I thought that jV was for tanru logical connectives
> while V alone was for sumti connections.
.skamyxatra

That's the way that the grammar is currently defined, but, *in theory*, if you
were to combine the two {selma'o} into one, it would not create any grammatical
ambiguities.  However, this technically only holds true when considering more
advanced parser programs; if you were to parse this new grammar using the
"classical" (to put it nicely) Yacc -- which the official grammar & parser
happen to rely on -- you would run into the same restriction described by the
CLL (due to the Yacc dependence) that applies when using non-logical
connectives on descriptor {sumti}, i.e., a construct of the form "{lo broda
[ku] joi lo brode}" cannot elide the "{ku}" after "{lo broda}" without
upsetting legacy parsers.  Whether or not Lojban grammar should be held back by
nearly forty year-old computer programs has, as far as I know, not been
conclusively decided upon by the BPFK.

mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.

-- 
le do cizra notci cu kairgau mi lo nalselcme kamte'a