From lojbab@lojban.org Fri Apr 18 16:18:30 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 23:18:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 15733 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2003 23:18:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Apr 2003 23:18:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Apr 2003 23:18:30 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 196f7l-0002RD-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:18:29 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196f7d-0002Qu-00; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:18:21 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lakemtao03.cox.net ([68.1.17.242]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196f7W-0002QU-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:18:14 -0700 Received: from lojban.lojban.org ([68.100.92.1]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030418231744.LYJH23518.lakemtao03.cox.net@lojban.lojban.org> for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 19:17:44 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030418191646.034a6b30@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 19:18:09 -0400 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: ynai In-Reply-To: <3EA0E569.1060602@bilkent.edu.tr> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-archive-position: 4852 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Robert LeChevalier Reply-To: lojbab@lojban.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1120595 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab At 01:58 AM 4/19/03 -0400, robin.bcc wrote: >Craig wrote: > >>".y" is in selma'o Y, not UI - can it really be negated? > > > > > > Y shouldn't be negatable. Y is not negatable in actual usage. The Book does > > not mention Y being negatable. Jbofi'e thinks Y is negatable. Jordan tells > > me that the BNF disagrees. Hrm, looks like Y is not negatable. > >If I remember rightly, the CLL is always right, unless it contradicts >the YACC grammar. The YACC grammar is always right unless it >contradicts the BNF grammar. All hail to the BNF. Backwards. The YACC is superior to the BNF, since the YACC can/has been formally checked. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org