Re: [lojban] tanru ordering and a cmavo proposal

[Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>]

Why should you have to do that? Under that argument, if you talk in the order that you think, and the order that you think is T S SS ST, you wind up with like:
broda co brode ko'a si si si be ko'e co brode ko'a
which is just horrible, and would be pretty much completely unintelligible in speech. 

True, {co'ai} doesn't allow you to say anything new, but it does allow you to say old things in a new way. In addition, I'd go so far as to say that the T S SS ST order is in some sense the one that makes the most sense. You start out with a general relation T, you refine it with S, you refine it further with SS, then you describe what's actually being related.

mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Mark E. Shoulson <mark@kli.org> wrote:

On 01/05/2011 09:47 AM, Ian Johnson wrote:

This proposal is about {co}. There are basically two orders of seltau, tertau, sumti-of-seltau, and sumti-of-tertau that are allowed. These are:
[ST] S SS T ST. No {co} needed.
[ST] T ST S SS. {co} needed.

The following case came up on IRC last night and is not possible at the moment:
[ST] T S SS ST
The problem is that once you use {co}, any sumti you throw out there afterwards are SS automatically. In essence this is basically like being trapped in a NU, where all the sumti you say get sucked up into the NU until {kei} or something that forces it like {cu} comes up. Accordingly, why should {co} not have a terminator? Have a terminator like {co'ai}, and then you have equivalences like:

ko'a broda co brode ko'e ko'i co'ai ko'o == ko'a brode be ko'e bei broda ko'i

Formally:
Proposal: {co'ai}. Terminator for {co}. When supplied, sumti that follow it are considered to be sumti of the tertau, rather than sumti of the seltau.

I don't think it's necessary, any more than we need something in a stream of sumti that signals "OK, the following sumti are arguments to the seltau, not the tertau."  The whole point of {co} is that at least as far as following sumti are concerned, the tanru has *become* reversed, and now the seltau is the head.  If you wanted trailing sumti on the tertau, you should have attached them with {be}/{bei} before the {co}.

~mark

--
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.

-- 
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.