[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful

To: Nick NICHOLAS <nicholas@uci.edu>
Subject: Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful
From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:57:44 -0400
Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com
References: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0108131230570.17813-100000@e4e.oac.uci.edu>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686; en-US; rv:0.9.1) Gecko/20010607

Nick NICHOLAS wrote:

From the Wiki: http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?cmene . Is there any

official verdict on the usage of CMENE and selma'o, John?



It's certainly bogus to call CMENE a selma'o, though the internal
code of the parser does (as well as BRIVLA).  In Lojban, a better
term such as vlalei would be preferred.  Then there are 3 vlalei
and 120+ selma'o.

--
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful
  - From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <lojbab@lojban.org>

References:
- selma'o considered harmful
  - From: Nick NICHOLAS <nicholas@uci.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: [lojban] New to lojban, any suggestions?
Next by Date: Re: [lojban] New to lojban, any suggestions?
Previous by thread: selma'o considered harmful
Next by thread: Re: [lojban] selma'o considered harmful
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread