la tsani cu cusku di'e
P.S. (as in pre scriptum ?) This e-mail turned out longer than I had originally intended, but I think that it's worthwhile letting the mailing list in on this discovery I made just yesterday and expanded today in #lojban. [...]
An interesting read, but I'm not sure you can call it a "discovery" if it's been in jbofi'e all along (or is jbofi'e's output what you based your discovery on?):
{mi do dunda be ko'a}:
[1(2[dunda1 (give-r(s)) :] mi I, me)2 (3[dunda3 (recipient(s)) :] do
you)3 [is, does] «4{5dunda giv-ing be (6[dunda2 (gift(s)) :] ko'a
he/she/it)6}5»4]1
Clearly, someone must have implemented it this way (knowingly, I assume). Of course, we cannot be sure that jbofi'e has any authority about such things. The most useful interpretation should optimally be the preferred one.
Here is a past thread on this very topic: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/lojban-beginners/QiZ5pF9q34I/MDaYSI0q0agJ
It doesn't look like there was a consensus of whether "ko'a ko'e ko'i broda" should mean the same as "ko'a ko'e broda be ko'i". Personally, I think it should be as jbofi'e parses it (that is, they are not equivalent), because it gives us more options/flexibility.
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i -- 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. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.