Re: Machine grammar and elidables

[cowan (John Cowan)]

Dave Cortesi writes:
>    It was indeed the presence of the cu-included and cu-omitted but otherwise
> identical rules that had lead to my conclusion.  Is there any semantic
> difference caused by the presence of the "cu".  If not, why not eliminate
> it entirely?

In a word, pragmatics.  "cu" is very powerful for sealing off complex
1st places; often the most complex places in a Lojban bridi are the first
and last (indeed, often they are the only places).   By inserting a "cu",
one can often omit three or four other elidable terminators.

-- 
cowan@snark.thyrsus.com		...!uunet!cbmvax!snark!cowan
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban