--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
On 26.09.2016 16:43, And Rosta wrote:
Having given the matter about .0001% of the thought you have, I wonder
whether the gi'i terminator is optimal. Firstly it would not always be
easy to work out on the fly when it is and isn't elidable, so the
prudent strategy would be to leave it in except when certain it is
elidable. Secondly, when it isn't elided it adds an extra word and two
extra syllables. A better alternative would be to introduce medial
conjuncts with _go_ rather than _gi_, and use _gi_ only for introducing
final conjuncts: {ga JA A go B go C gi D}. (Or, one step neater, use
_gu_ for medial conjuncts and _go_ for the tanru coordination
introducer. Or _ge_.)
The only times {gi'i} would not be elidible is if another connective follows that is supposed to apply to the entire forethought connection to its left. In all other cases {gi'i} is elidible, because each {gi} can only devour exactly one sumti, after which the entire connection ends automatically.
Your strategy with {go} would involve much more forethought than this, because you would have to be absolutely certain that you only want to add exactly one more item.
Do you have any situations in mind where working out whether {gi'i} is elidible would not be easy?
Thank you for your comment.
~~~mi'e la solpa'i
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You can test the JACU connective system here:
• http://lojban.github.io/ilmentufa/camxes.html
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
Aha, I found .xorxes.'s proposal. Apparently it overloads {gi}, while this one does not?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/ExtEumbYoQg
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
As a nintadni whose opinion arguably doesn't matter that much*, I've avoided using connectives because I was horribly confused by what I've read about the existing system. .i .ie ji'a lo frica nintadni cu tugni lo du'u mi'a cinmo lo xrani .uanmonai There were so many words to remember for different situations! When I read the new proposal, I immediately understood the proposed system. It seems much more elegant than the existing system. I really like it. .i lo mibypre cu pa'itce lo melbi selti'i
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/ewQLBEaH52s/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
My experience with lo nintadni is that the problem is definitely not in the system itself but in how it is taught.
CLL by design is not a tutorial, and other textbooks by far only tried to copy it, successfully or unsuccessfully.
My experience with lo nintadni is that the problem is definitely not in the system itself but in how it is taught.
CLL by design is not a tutorial, and other textbooks by far only tried to copy it, successfully or unsuccessfully.The new system is much more intuitive than the old. I don't think that is entirely due to how it is taught. Having 5 words to remember instead of 26 is nice assuming 5 can do the work of 26.
I've been reading the CLL in various sections throughout the book and I haven't come across as much concept confusion as I have when attempting to make it through the section on the connective system. CLL is indeed not a tutorial, but I feel like I gain much more understanding out of it than reading the textbooks. It makes everything make sense and feel connected with the top-down view. I feel the theoretical basis for old connective system isn't great. It doesn't feel elegant.
It doesn't seem to fit within the Lojban language as well as other concepts. I don't really notice others using the connectives too much either in the IRC. But errr, I may have not been paying the closest attention. I can at least speak for myself in that the old system confuses the hell out of me when reading about it in CLL compared to reading other concepts in CLL.I want to use connectives but I don't know how!
I don't think I understand it, but whatever. The logical vs. non-logical distinction and other parts are still confusing me. Thank you for the explanation though. I probably just need to try and read more on it.Anyway-- where can I find the mentioned previous, similar proposals? Would you include links, or are they buried in the mailing list? I'd like to learn more.
{ko'a cu} is not a bridi-head, since a bridi-head can appear only before a bridi-tail. (I gave an informal characterization of bridi-heads and bridi-tails in my last message. Notice that my characterization rules out {ko'a cu} as a bridi-head, as it does not precede a bridi-tail.)
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/to pic/lojban/ewQLBEaH52s/unsubsc ribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/to pic/lojban/ewQLBEaH52s/unsubsc ribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroup s.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@ googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
To me, this is a feature, not a bug. I dislike omitting {lo}.
> {lo nixli je nanla} means "someone who is a girl and a boy at the same time."
To me, this is a feature, not a bug.
I dislike omitting {lo}.
Maybe no-one. I just thought that it would be good to point out that it is not a problematic property of the language to me.
> Who doubts that?
Maybe no-one. I just thought that it would be good to point out that it is not a problematic property of the language to me.