* Sunday, 2014-10-26 at 22:33 +0100 - Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com>:
> On 22/10/2014 02:22, Martin Bays wrote:
> > Is {broda xoi xo'i [tag] ke'a} not equivalent to {[tag] broda}?
> Not really.
Yes, that was wrong in quite a few ways. Thanks.
> {fi'o broda xy} has a rather vague semantic, it's not clear
> how the bridi is related to the fact/event of "xy broda".
>
> However I think {fi'o xo'i TAG} = {TAG}, by definition.
I guess that can't be literally true, since the former is vague as you
say while the latter isn't.
> {xo'i}'s purpose is to allow using directly the predicates that are
> underlying sumtcita whose associated predicate hasn't any Lojban
> predicate word (e.g. {pu'i}, {nu'o}, {za'o} and the like).
> However I'm not fond of {xo'i}, I'd rather prefer the missing sumtcita
> predicates to be given a real predicate word and be done with it. :)
It's useful for the kind of formal conversions this thread is mostly
about, though. I don't know how to handle {pe [tag]} without using
{xo'i} (and without having a lookup table to find an appropriate
selbri).
By the way: if we take {broda} to be equivalent to {da fasnu gi'e nu
broda}, is {broda xoi brodu} equivalent to {da fasnu gi'e nu broda kei
gi'e brodu}?
Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature