The idea is that {da tavla lo broda be de} should expand into {su'o da zo'u da tavla zo'e noi su'o de zo'u ke'a de broda} and not into {su'o da su'o de zo'u da tavla zo'e noi ke'a de broda}
This fits in with the general principle that logical variables bind to the closest bridi, and lo clauses have implicit bridi introduced by the noi.
.i mi'e la tsani mu'o
I don't understand the related point. Can you give an example?--
El viernes, 16 de mayo de 2014 17:22:16 UTC-4, xorxes escribió:On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Ian Johnson <blindb...@gmail.com> wrote:
In short: the former. Note that this is not Word of BPFK, merely Word of Tsani (with agreement from several others, myself included).
That's the reasonable answer, backed up by the parsing structure.A related point is that quantifiers in a be-argument shouldn't be exportable to the main prenex, because they belong to the definition of the new selbri created by "be". This can be used to give a quantifier that appears later in the sentence scope over one that appeared earlier, but inside a be-argument.mu'o mi'e xorxes
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.