Re: [lojban] Re: "la" rule

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

On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 04:45:24PM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 04:41:32PM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 07:30:47PM -0500, Robert McIvor wrote:
> > > 
> > > I will assume you wish to have a rule that does not require
> > > recognizing the presence of the 'forbidden' combinations in
> > > the word.  To do this, one would have to have all cmene
> > > marked with one of the  name introducers like doi or la (I
> > > presume 'doi' is normally used  like 'hoi' in Loglan to
> > > precede a name used as a vocative.  
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > > If this  be true, then the parser can strip off the
> > > introducer, and the  remainder up to the consonant and pause
> > > is a name (I presume that a  person without a speech defect
> > > would not pause in the middle of a  name).  The LaPlace
> > > problem was in sequential names. For sequential  names we used
> > > the Loglan word for hyphen 'ci', which added 'ci' to  the list
> > > of name markers.
> > 
> > You know, I think that actually works.  Or, at least, I can't
> > think of any problems off the top of my head.
> > 
> > Call the Lojban name hyphen xi'i; laSTIvn.xi'iLAItl. has no
> > ambiguity I can see.
> 
> However, {doilaSTIvn.} is ambiguous still.  It's not a
> particularily hard ambiguity to fix (strip *all* name markers off
> the front), but still.  Does Loglan allow that construct?

Replying to myself, this is a bigger problem than I thought.  Is
{coi.lanam.} == {coi la nam} or {coi lanam}?  Does Loglan have this
sort of construct?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/