Re: [lojban] Re: shorthand for conversations

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 04:36:12PM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> --- Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> > But if you saw:
> > 
> >     la .alis. cusku lu pamoi jufra li'u 
> >     la .bab. cusku lu remoi jufra li'u
> >     la .alis. zo'u cimoi jufra
> > 
> > you would understand what had just happened, right?
> 
> I would probably understand, but that doesn't make it right,
> or desirable, or whatever. I would understand this too:
> 
>   alis: coi bab
>   bab: coi alis

If you take zo'u as :, those are basically identical.

> In the case of a play, something like that is what should be used
> probably, because "alis:" and "bab:" are not meant to be
> pronounced by anyone, so they need not be a part of the parsable
> text.

True.

> > If it's really an issue of confusion, the author just has to
> > say:
> > 
> >     mi pilno lu ko'a zo'u jufra li'u le sinxa be lu ko'a cusku
> >     lu jufra li'u li'u
> > 
> > at the top somewhere.
> 
> And give up the use of zo'u with its normal meaning in the whole
> text? Seems like too high a price to pay. 

Depends on the text.

> Also, it means that if you want to quote some short part of the
> text that doesn't include the introduction you have to explain
> that the use of zo'u is nonstandard.

True.

-Robin

-- 
Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/  ***   I'm a *male* Robin.
"Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all
from running out and eating all the cookies."  -- Eliezer Yudkowsky
http://www.lojban.org/             ***              .i cimo'o prali .ui