* Monday, 2014-10-06 at 19:28 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
> > * Sunday, 2014-10-05 at 15:03 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com
> > > What value does "ko'a" get in "su'oi tadni poi sruri su'o dinju zi'e goi
> > > ko'a"? Or for that matter in "su'oi tadni goi ko'a", or in "no tadni goi
> > > ko'a"? I think that's the value that the noi-clause should be about.
> >
> > Well... in all cases, I just have ko'a binding to the variable, so that
> > doesn't help at all!
>
> How about in "ko'a goi su'o tadni cu broda" or "ko'a goi no tadni cu
> broda"?
The same; I take the order to matter only in edge cases like {ko'a goi
ko'e} where both are already bound - then ko'e gets bound to the value
of ko'a.
> > (so I have e.g. {ro broda goi ko'a brode ko'a} ->
> > {ro da poi broda cu brode da}, and {ro broda goi ko'a du .i ko'a du}
> > being an error.)
>
> Is it an error because you don't admit unassigned "ko'a" i.e. is "ko'a du"
> by itself an error? Or is it an error because "ko'a" was at some point
> bound to a bound variable, and that makes that variable unusable until it
> is cleared with whatever the cmavo for clearing it was, which I can't
> remember now?
Yes, I have it staying bound to the now-unbound variable, hence the
error. So e.g. donkey sentences like {ro tercange poi ponse su'o xasli
goi ko'a cu darxi ko'a} are errors.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature