From ragnarok@pobox.com Fri Apr 18 15:11:16 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_5); 18 Apr 2003 22:11:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 45569 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2003 22:11:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Apr 2003 22:11:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Apr 2003 22:11:15 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 196e4h-0001qh-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 15:11:15 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196e4a-0001qO-00; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 15:11:08 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 18 Apr 2003 15:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196e4S-0001qE-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 15:11:00 -0700 Received: from craig [209.42.200.60] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-7.13) id A7D9B8C0266; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:10:33 -0400 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: ynai Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:10:29 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20030418201816.GB16622@mit.edu> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Declude-Sender: ragnarok@pobox.com [209.42.200.60] X-archive-position: 4840 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ragnarok@pobox.com Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: "Craig" Reply-To: ragnarok@pobox.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> >{mi viska le bloti y nai} is grammatical according to jbofi'e, but {mi >> viska >> >le bloti nai} is not. Is it correct? >> >> The nai bonds to the y. NAI never bond to a word other than the immediately >> preceeding one. Thus, mi viska le bloti ynai means "I see the boat (and I >> don't hesitate to say so)" whereas mi viska le bloti nai is ungramatical. I >> have been unable to find Y being negated in this way in any real use, >> however. >That's icky. Saying "uh" should not change the grammar of the sentence. >It should be pre-parsed out like word+SI. The ickiness of ynai is probably responsible for its complete lack of use. As NAI shepherd on the BPFK, I have looked for that particular compound before, and it does not seem to exist. Aside from being in the grammar (at least jbofi'e thinks so; I can't read BNF), there is nothing in the baseline at present telling us that ynai should be grammatical. My interpretation that the nai bonds to the y is based on the fact that in every single other use, nai bonds to the word right before it.