Talk:BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
Archived Tiki forum discussion for BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo. Original authors, UTC times, and post IDs are retained below.
BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo (Tiki thread #2935)
Re: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2004-11-15 01:56 UTC · Tiki post #2937 (reply to #2935)
I've used no'i a few times in my own fiction writings, which haven't been released yet. Also, I get 28 hits from [1], some from Alice but most from IRC.
-RobinRe: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
PierreAbbat · 2004-11-15 02:32 UTC · Tiki post #2943 (reply to #2935)
Re: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2005-01-27 21:41 UTC · Tiki post #3802 (reply to #2935)
My requests:
s/to make a free modifier/to make a free modifier, which can be placed almost anywhere in Lojban text/ (in lieu of actually defining what a free modifier is).
Please expand the definition of zo'u a bit. Mention the topic comment thingy, and that it is used in logical contexts to logically quantify terms in advance of their usage. As phma said, defining "term" would be nice too.
-RobinBPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
arj · 2005-01-29 21:09 UTC · Tiki post #3811 (reply to #2935)
> Please expand the definition of zo'u a bit. Mention the topic comment > thingy, and that it is used in logical contexts to logically quantify > terms in advance of their usage. As phma said, defining "term" would be > nice too.
I absolutely agree. However, I have no idea WTF a "term" is. I would appreciate any suggestions.
-- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups. (Wethern's Law)BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2005-01-29 21:09 UTC · Tiki post #3812 (reply to #2935)
wrote: > On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 [email protected] wrote: > > >Please expand the definition of zo'u a bit. Mention the topic > >comment thingy, and that it is used in logical contexts to > >logically quantify terms in advance of their usage. As phma > >said, defining "term" would be nice too. > > I absolutely agree. However, I have no idea WTF a "term" is. I > would appreciate any suggestions.
The CLL section on ce'e, in the connectives chapter, explains this, as I said on IRC. It's a sumti or a tag + sumti.
-RobinRe: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2005-01-29 21:13 UTC · Tiki post #3813 (reply to #2935)
BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
arj · 2005-01-30 00:38 UTC · Tiki post #3814 (reply to #2935)
> Re: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
> One more thing: zo'u should say a bit about prenexes, i.e. that they ont > come at the beginning of a sentence.
Pardon?
> And perhaps s/following sentence/rest of the sentence/
That is a bit better, I agree. The only thing is I have doubts that "sentence" is well-defined enough.
-- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups. (Wethern's Law)BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2005-01-30 00:38 UTC · Tiki post #3815 (reply to #2935)
wrote: > On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 [email protected] wrote: > > >Re: BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo > > >One more thing: zo'u should say a bit about prenexes, i.e. that > >they ont come at the beginning of a sentence. > > Pardon?
s/ont/only/
> >And perhaps s/following sentence/rest of the sentence/ > > That is a bit better, I agree. The only thing is I have doubts > that "sentence" is well-defined enough.
The bit between successive .i, NIhO, LU or TUhE.
-RobinBPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
xorxes · 2005-01-31 12:33 UTC · Tiki post #3816 (reply to #2935)
> > The only thing is I have doubts > > that "sentence" is well-defined enough. > > The bit between successive .i, NIhO, LU or TUhE.
LU is not directly related to sentences: inside it can have more than one sentence, and as a whole it is just a sumti.
In parser terms, a sentence is a selbri plus zero or more preceding and/or following terms, the prenex is not defined as a part of a sentence. Maybe it would be better to use {bridi} for that.
We can of course define the prenex as part of a sentence. The bit between succesive .i can also include fragments. Is a fragment a sentence?
Also, at the start of text we can have weird stuff that can't appear between succesive .i, for example {djan ua} (but not, for some reason, {ua djan}). Is {djan ua} a sentence?
TUhE can bracket more than one sentence. Is the bracketed result just one sentence?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo
rlpowell · 2005-01-31 19:01 UTC · Tiki post #3820 (reply to #2935)
> > --- Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > The only thing is I have doubts that "sentence" is > > > well-defined enough. > > > > The bit between successive .i, NIhO, LU or TUhE. > > LU is not directly related to sentences: inside it can have more > than one sentence, and as a whole it is just a sumti.
True.
> In parser terms, a sentence is a selbri plus zero or more > preceding and/or following terms, the prenex is not defined as a > part of a sentence. Maybe it would be better to use {bridi} for > that.
Oh. You're right. A prenex can, in fact, be followed by multiple logically joined sentences as well.
Let's just say that a prenex comes before one or more logically connected Lojban sentences, OK?
-RobinBPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo (Tiki thread #2948)
Wiki page BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo changed
Anonymous · 2004-11-15 06:29 UTC · Tiki post #2949 (reply to #2948)
<[email protected]> wrote: > !!zo'e > Marks the end of a prenex.
I think you mean {zo'u}?
mu'o mi'e .filip. --
Philip Newton <[email protected]>Wiki page BPFK Section: Text Structure cmavo changed
pycyn · 2004-11-15 20:29 UTC · Tiki post #2953 (reply to #2948)
> with the preceding numeral to make a free > modifier. > ;mai:Enumerates a higher-level section in the > text. Combines with the preceding numeral to > make a free modifier.
Second is {mo'o}?
