[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2




On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:

I actually think {tu'a} deserves its own selma'o. Not only is it different from the other LAhE, there is also a proposal to allow {tu'a} to work on tag-terms:

tu'a bai ko'a -> lo su'u bai ko'a zo'u co'e

Makes sense. So we can say for example:

  mi zmanei tu'a se pi'o lo forca
  "I prefer with a fork."  

There are no obviously useful corresponding forms for the other LAhE, so I would personally be tempted to move {tu'a} to TUhA rather than creating a bunch of meaningless but "grammatical" forms for non-{tu'a} LAhE.

Right. 

In a similar vein, I am for splitting up the PA selma'o in order to outlaw the many nonsensical grammatical PA-strings and to give the meaningful PA-strings a proper parse tree (which they currently do not have. The meaning of complex quantifiers corresponds only rarely to the structure the parser suggests).

I agree.

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.