[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: TECH: query on zoi & laho terminators
Will the stuff marked by "zoi gy." and "laho gy." *in writing*
be terminated by:
(i) "energy" but not "lager" (or "saga", for you rhotics)
(ii) "lager" but not "energy"
(iii) either "lager" or "energy"
(i) seems reasonable, but this means that what is
grammatical Lojban when written may not be grammatical when
If (iii) is the rule, does it apply to spoken Lojban as well?
If it does, perhaps someone should think up robust default quotation
demarcators for various languages, such that the demarcators
are unlikely to occur in either the speech or the writing of
that language. (E.g. for quoting English "jvy." might be
fairly robust (whereas for French it wouldn't be: "je veux").)
mihelahojvy. And jvy.
I believe the terminator is required to be a lojban word, and must
be set off from the text by lojban pause eather end. (Since
people usually use lerfu or names, the closing terminator
is normally followed by a pause too, but that's not part of
If I am right, then none of your examples would terminate,
unless you carelessly left a space/pause, in which case
i) would terminate in writing, ii) in speech.
Since zoi and la'o import foreign langauges into lojban,
the isomorphism between written and spoken lojban
(which I believe is overstated anyway) breaks down in
these cases. It is unfortunate that this could make the
difference between grammatical and ungrammatical
text, but geting foreign languages in is a kludge anyway,
so there are bound to be problems.
In any case 'jvy' is not a valid lojban word and so your
signoff is not grammatical.
co'o mi'e kolin