[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] la .alis.
On Mar 30, 2010, at 11:34, Michael Everson wrote:
The right-side, I can deal with most of it. There is one thing in
that example that is seriously grating, however. To use the first
sentence: "...gi'e zukte fi noda. I abuboi...." This is horrible.
Accepting your desire to capitalize for this example only, that
phrase should be "...gie' zukte fi noda .i Abuboi....".
So you're treating .i like a danda, or | not belonging to either
sentence? What do people think about that?
I don't recall what the formal grammar has to say (if it does; the
grammar is constructed largely without regard to semantics but only
accept/reject), but for example, free modifiers (such as “za'a”)
attach to the construct whose “head”, shall we say, is the preceding
word. In “broda i za'a brode”, the “za'a” is considered to apply to
the sentence “brode”, not “broda”. Therefore “i” is associated with
the *following* sentence, not the preceding ones.
However, I almost agree with the notion of capitalizing that-after-
the-“i”, rather than the “i” on *aesthetic* grounds, of not
capitalizing the same letter all the time.
In the case of connectives, “i Ja abuboi” feels very wrong to me, as
opposed to “I ja abuboi” or “i ja Abuboi”.
(Note that this is written in the context of “If we capitalize, where
do we put it”, without necessarily approving of capitalization at all.)
--
Kevin Reid <http://switchb.org/kpreid/>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.