scope845h...@icebubble.org
unread,Jan 8, 2020, 12:46:43 AM1/8/20Sign in to reply to author
Sign in to forward
You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Sign in to report message
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi rodo,
I have a couple of (3) questions about {BO} and how it behaves when it
is used in a sumti containing both logical (A) and non-logical (JOI)
connectives and/or tensed logical connections (A+PU+BO, JOI+PU+BO).
(I thought about posting this to the Lojban Beginners' list, but it
didn't seem like a beginners' question. Feel free to re-/cross-post if
you think that appropriate.)
{le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu .e le xekri .e le blabi} means
"(((the red and the green) and the blue) and the black) and the white",
but {BO} increases connective precedence and reverses associativity, so
{le xunre .e le crino .ebo le blanu .ebo le xekri .e le blabi} means
"(the red and (the green and (the blue and the black))) and the white".
This works with non-logical connectives, too, i.e.:
{le xunre joi le crino joibo le blanu joibo le xekri joi le blabi} means
"(the red with (the green with (the blue with the black))) with the white".
That's how {BO} is supposed to work. But what if your sumti contains
BOTH logical and non-logical connectives? Example:
{le xunre .e le crino .e le blanu joi le xekri .e le blabi}
or even:
{le xunre joibo le crino .ebo le blanu .e le xekri joi le blabi}
So, my questions are:
(1) Are the logical connectives (eks, jeks, etc.) and non-logical
connectives (JOI, BIhI, etc.) treated the same when it comes to
pairing-off connected sumti? Or are, for example, the non-logical
connectives given higher precedence than the logical connectives?
(A higher precedence for non-logical connectives would make it
easier to transform a bridi containing the sumti into
logically-connected bridi containing the non-logically-connected
component sumti.)
(2) Is a {BO} attached to a non-logical connective treated identically
to a {BO} attached to a logical connective? Or does, for example,
a {BO} following {JOI} have higher precedence than a {BO} following
{A}?
Lastly, I am confused about the role of {BO} in tensed logical
connections, those of the form {A+PU+BO} or {JOI+PU+BO}. I.e.,
{le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu .ebabo le xekri .ebo le blabi}
or even:
{le xunre .e le crino .ebabo le blanu joi le xekri joibo le blabi}
So, my third and final question:
(3) Does a {BO} required by a tensed connection {A+PU+BO} or {JOI+PU+BO}
(where the {BO} is NOT optional) have the same effect as a {BO} on
an untensed connective (where {BO}s are discretionary)? Or are
tensed logical connectives treated as being {BO}-less? By my
reading of the grammar, a tensed connection cannot be followed by
two consective {BO}s in a row, i.e. {.apubobo}, to disambiguate the
precedence intended.
Yes, I realize that the pragmatic solution is just to disambiguate any
potentially confusing connections using {KE}..{KEhE} parentheses. But
I'd like to know what the formal rules are for how these different kinds
of connectives interact with each other and with the cmavo {BO}. I
can't find anyplace in the CLL which speaks to this kind of interaction.
Much thanks in bo advance!