[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [jboske] anaphora & glorking (was: RE: sane kau? (was: RE: Re: RE: Re: lo'edu'u



Jordan DeLong scripsit:

> I don't know why the seperate prenex infront of the ".ije" was
> removed from the grammar.  It used to be there, and there's even
> examples in CLL which use it (chap 16).  In order for the 'external
> bridi negation' rules to work properly it must exist also.

Ambiguity.  If a prenex is allowed before each individual sentence,
and also before the group of ijek-connected sentences, we can't tell
when we see a prenex after .i or ni'o or start-of-text which kind it is
and what its scope is.

> I don't know if fixing this is something the BF can do.  But it's
> a contradiction in CLL, so it should be at least considered.

I agree that it is a contradiction and should be fixed, but at the
moment I don't see quite how.

-- 
And through this revolting graveyard of the universe the muffled, maddening
beating of drums, and thin, monotonous whine of blasphemous flutes from
inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond Time; the detestable pounding
and piping whereunto dance slowly, awkwardly, and absurdly the gigantic
tenebrous ultimate gods --  the blind, voiceless, mindless gargoyles whose soul
is Nyarlathotep. (Lovecraft) John Cowan|jcowan@hidden.email|ccil.org/~cowan