[lojban] Re: Founders: sei restriction motivation?

[<lojban-out@lojban.org>]

I always thought it was a deliberate decision, not a grammar limitation.  What's the difference between your modified (trailing sumti accepting) SEI/SEhU and TO/TOI?  Further, any change would be non-backwards compatable, reparsing {sei la .alis. cusku mi gleki} like {sei la .alis. cusku be mi se'u gleki} instead of {sei la .alis. cusku se'u mi gleki}.  Unless I'm completely misunderstanding your question.

-----Original Message-----

From:  Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
Subj:  [lojban] Founders: sei restriction motivation?
Date:  Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:46 pm
Size:  554 bytes
To:  lojban-list@lojban.org


Is there any reason for the "cmavo in sei...se'u must be linked by
be/bei/be'o" restriction?  Besides computer grammar issues, I mean.

-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/


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.



To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.