Re: [lojban] Re: New PA-proposal

[maikxlx <maikxlx@gmail.com>]

2011/11/18 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:50 AM, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It seems that people are attempting to create a grammar for PA that produces
>> all and ONLY those number strings that make sense. This is worthwhile, I
>> think, but also unnecessary. We don't worry about which letters produce
>> grammatical sentences, only which words.
>
> Not the best analogy. PAs are words, and in any case letters have very
> strict restrictions on how they can be combined to form words. In
> fact, in Lojban there are two and only two letters that may be said to
> belong to the same "letter-selma'o", i.e. such that they can always
> occupy the same position in a phonologically valid word. All other
> letters have their own individual grammars. (Exercise for the reader:
> which letters are those?)
>
You have a knack for summing things up.  My guess is {e} and {o}, by the way.

>> Also, given that Lojban's grammar
>> treats all gismu equally and all members of a selma'o equally, there is
>> strong precedent for not creating special grammar for PA.
>
> The grammar of PA would amount to splitting PA into several selma'o, of course.
>
> mu'o mi'e xorxes
>
IMVHO we should be seeing proposals for fewer selma'o, not more.

-- 
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.