Subject: Re: [lojban] su'u

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 23:06:32 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 12:52:54AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> >
> > > > I don't know about meaningless, but it would be ambiguous.
> > > > {le nu mi klama} could mean {(le nu mi) klama} and
> > > > {le nu (mi klama}.
> > >
> > >As a fragment, maybe, but mi catlu le nu do klama is quite clear.
> > >
> > >-Robin
> >
> > But no matter how many clear cases there are, as long as
> > there is one ambiguous case we have ambiguity.
> >
> > do catlu be le nu mi klama
> >
> > could parse as: do (catlu be le nu mi) klama
> > or as: do catlu be le nu (mi klama)
>
> If that were true, then do catlu be le nu mi would parse, but it
> doesn't, at least not in jbofi'e.

la jbofi'e ca'anai tercupra jimpe ki'u le du'u le cmavo be zo nu cu
mapti cei broda le bridi .enai le sumti .i le xusra pe la xorxes. onai
broda

-----
We do not like And if a cat
those Rs and Ds, needed a hat?
Who can't resist Free enterprise
more subsidies. is there for that!