On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:58 AM, 'Wuzzy' via lojban <lojban@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Of course, the question how to say this in Lojban came up.
Xorxes suggested “bu letteral” to be lojbanized as “zo bu zei lerfu”.
This looks strange and unintitive to me. I am not even sure if this is
grammatical and if yes, under _which_ grammar? xD PEG? YACC? Something
else?After the Magic Words reform, which to my understanding coincided with the writing of the PEG, {zo WORD} is a single word for purposes of word counting.Sort of. It's a single word for those magic words that look back (so for "bu", for the left side of "zei", for "si"), but it's not a single word for magic words that look forward (you can't quote it with "zo", you can't use it as the right side component of "zei". Magic words that look forward will just see "zo" as a word, so "zo zo cmavo" is a full bridi, not a quote of "zo cmavo"."zo bu zei lerfu" works both for PEG and for YACC, with the caveat that YACC uses a pre-parsing lexing process before the actual YACC kicks in.Word counting is relevant to {si}, {bu}, and {zei}, and I think nothing else, provided we exclude experimental cmavo. This means {zo si si} is the empty string, {zo bu zei lerfu} is a valid lujvo, and {zo bu bu} is a valid lerfu.Yes, "si", "bu" and "zei" need to know what counts as "previous word". but "zo" and "zei" need to know what counts as "next word".mu'o mi'e xorxes