Subject: Re: [lojban] Train catching ut nunc

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 07:18:21 -0500

At 07:59 PM 03/16/2001 -0500, Rob Speer wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:29:17PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> > > How the hell _DO_ you talk about the selma'o in lojban text, anyways?
> > > 'CAhA' is, of course, not a valid lojban word.

Yes, but "ca'a" is, and the selma'o is equally "ca'a" as "CAhA". The 
latter is a written convention to have it stand out from the word, and of 
course to foil the UNIX/YACC restriction on asterisks. But in a place 
structure that holds a selma'o by definition, there should be no confusion 
in using a cmavo name that is also a selma'o name.

> le do pu tadji cu banzu .i le selma'o poi do pu djica cu selcmene zo ca'a

>But then how do you express a selma'o like 'UI4'?

zoui xivo if you feel a need for the subscript, which is not technically 
part of the selma'o name, but is a sorting convention for the benefit of 
wordlist makers.

> {le cmavo be lo'u ui vo
>le'u}? I see no other way of quoting a selma'o made of more than one Lojban
>word than by using the error quote.

lu ui xi vo li'u if you want to include the subscript in the quote, which 
seems reasonable.

>And what if it was {le cmavo be lo'u pa vo
>le'u}?

paxivo works. So would papi'evo and paboivo if it didn't.

>Would you use 'zei' to achieve this? {le ui zei vo zei selma'o}
>
>I won't even ask about the asterisks...

tarci bu

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
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