[lojban-beginners] Re: bo

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 2/12/07, Karl Naylor <karl.org@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Why is there not a different cmavo for 'make this
> tag function as a connective'?  Did it just turn out that you
> generally want to use {bo} in these cases anyway, so they may as well
> be the same word?

I don't think that was the reason. I suspect it was more like:
"we can allow the insertion of a tag here and still make it parse
unambiguously, so let's just allow it". I don't think making tags into
connectives was a priority, it was just allowed because it didn't
break anything. As it turns out though, that function is more
useful than the tight binding one. It is rare that more than a single
connective is used, unless it's more than one conjunction
but in that case binding order makes no difference.

mu'o mi'e xorxes