[lojban] Re: New PA-proposal

[la klaku <jakobnybonissen@gmail.com>]

MorphemeAddict:

We can't allow different PA to follow different grammar, that much is
true. We would need in total four grammatical classes (PA, DUhE, CEhI
and PIhE, for instance). PIhE should bind two strings together, so we
need a new in PIhE (let's call it {xi'e}, to make an analogy to
{pi'e}), which just binds two strings together without any meaning.
This is used to say, for instance {li du'a pi'i fi'u ro xi'e mu no}
(too many out of them all, which is fifty) to avoid confusion as to
what is equal to fifty - them all or the fraction (in this case, it's
them all).
So I agree. If we just make three classes, one can still say all kinds
of nonsense, but it least we know how to parse it correctly.

Xorxes (Jorge):

I agree to all of the definitions in your proposal, but have a few
things against the grammar:

1) How do we know which numbers are contradictory? Are "many" a
contradiction to "less than X"? This needs a ton of arbitrary rules. I
vote that two number strings should always be joined with .e. In cases
where .a is needed, use two numbers. By the way, this also ensures a
nice rule: One number, one value. Anyway, this is semantics, and
should not affect the decision in making the new grammar.

2) The exact gouping confuses me a bit. How do you know, in your above
50-too-many example, what 50 refers to? The fraction or them all? That
is why I propose the use of number strings to avoid confusion.

Mark Shoulson:

It's totally a cop-out, and if I were in charge, I'd see many more
selma'o than now. I'm not, so perhaps we should keep it to a minimum

Thus my current suggestion:

selma'o PA: xo, all of current PA1 and PA2. Combines with each other
in the same string.

selma'o DUhE: du'e, mo'a, rau, ro, so'a, so'e, so'i, so'o, so'u, xo'e,
no'o, pai, te’o and tu’o. Constitute their own string.

selma'o CEhI: ce'i, ma'u, me'i, ni'u. za'u, da'a, su'e, su'o, ka'o and
fi’u. (and ci'i?): Takes the next string and convert in into a new
string. Right-grouping.

selma'o PIhE: pi'e, ki'o, xi'e (NEW), ji'i, pi and ra'e. Internal
modifier: Binds two strings together. Needs to be adjectent to a
string.

This sadly allows for totally crap numbers like {li ce'i pi pi xi'e
rau re no}, but at least a computer can parse it, and we should
understand it if it made sense (li <ce'i <pi pi xi'e rau>> re no)

I know I seem a bit pushy, but I'd like to see some product so the
discussion won't just go to into oblivion when the thread dies.

-- 
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.