On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:46 AM, Chris Capel <
pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm using alice as a source of stuff to translate to test my
parser/glosser. When alice starts a new HTML paragraph, the official
parser doesn't say that it's starting a new lojban paragraph. For
that, NIhO is required. Is a NIhO implied by an HTML paragraph break?
"la nicte cadzu", on the other hand, mostly starts new text paragraphs
with {ni'o}, but there are numerous exceptions which might have some
meaning. (Half a {ni'o}?)
Conventionally, casually, I think a paragraph break in text (or a
double-linebreak in plain text) does imply a new paragraph, and I'll
probably treat it as such whether or not it's technically accurate.
But I was wondering if the convention had any formal backing.
Chris Capel
Sometimes
people
write
like
this.
If someone had typed that way, for whatever pretty (or not) typesetting reasons they had, and then copy/pasted it into the parser/glosser, and that glosser puts in a {ni'o} at every double line break, then it would all get treated like separate sentences, even if, as in my example, it really is intended only to be one. It should be easy to tell from hearing something to know how to write it; and from seeing it written, how to say it; but as far as I know no one has said that a given pronunciation should have only one typesetting. People might, then, have reason to put words into what might look like paragraphs by shape, when actually they are in the same sentence. As an example, anyway. There are probably other, less extreme things that might be more reasonable and yet still would cause problems for a parser/glosser that inserted {ni'o} at double line breaks or at "paragraph breaks".
.mu'omi'e .skaryzgik.