Received: from mail-wi0-f192.google.com ([209.85.212.192]:33797) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YbPBw-00035t-GZ; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:36 -0700 Received: by widfb4 with SMTP id fb4sf5164765wid.1; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=PCXe34z6By1cAMovRtz9et6lCou0nGMBhKE+odaRJHY=; b=gnvNFRiZUHtJK7fxTpbvJR3UBzKIwv1bLkVNXLrGrc2EDmAxrWwuXAbnDKqwG0e2pF uhSSUeeQvYVybeLQFcdPL0Wos1PvSm5Kr27xgvO90qi/7mNYxBGAUO/ChrxlTTotZp/G cfTEIiDJJsGATd6251E4hpYoamYGcT14bbdGBLQLr4I8bK6wRRrEx5sHPkSz+1Or3k+E vQof4JULX5uGTAYnTDaRFtLCw1WkxUlEL8baUduHRel9xaEW9acdDTkDcJKZ0oZ8ya65 OCM5PxOIwh4TM77zJzv6/xdnt9YxIMGMN8CVFhSxfK1naObTjEqDWtvkzwYAso2ZD5Li Ye0A== X-Received: by 10.152.36.129 with SMTP id q1mr293264laj.2.1427443225553; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:25 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.197.2 with SMTP id iq2ls339984lac.100.gmail; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.142.1 with SMTP id rs1mr4261066lbb.19.1427443224862; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id sf8si51091wic.2.2015.03.27.01.00.24 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::236 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::236; Received: by mail-wi0-x236.google.com with SMTP id g7so33478319wib.1 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.206.98 with SMTP id ln2mr53931767wic.94.1427443224728; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.240.197 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:00:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:00:04 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] Improvements to fragments in ilmentufa parser To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c381ce58dc61051240864b X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::236 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_bar: - --001a11c381ce58dc61051240864b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2015-03-27 3:02 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Gleki Arxokuna < > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> 2015-03-26 1:04 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Gleki Arxokuna < >>> gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> E.g. I suppose COhE_elidible should be inserted to more constructs. bu= t >>>> I haven't looked at where it can be done. What else apart from what ha= s >>>> been done can be autocorrected to bridi status? >>>> >>> >>> Every fragment can. For example instead of fragment "ek" you could have >>> "KOhA_elidable ek KOhA_elidable COhE.elidable", where KOhA_elidable cou= ld >>> return "ZOhE". >>> >> >> Not sure I would use that. How would this work for joik? {joi} fragment >> could be understood both as {zo'e joi zo'e co'e} and as {co'e joi co'e} >> > > "joi" can't be a fragment though. The reason is that it would clash with > the sentence connective ".i joi". Fragment is a weird rule, I would happi= ly > remove relative clauses, links and linkargs from it. I don't think fragme= nt > "na" is used much either. > What methods do you use or want to make the development process happen faster? A web tool that would allow to insert a complete PEG file, compile it and test it online? > > >> Okay, then I'll add >> fragment =3D COhE_fragment / ek free* / gihek free* / quantifier / >> (NA_clause !JA_clause free*)+ / relative_clauses / links / linkargs >> >> COhE_fragment =3D prenex (terms GOhA_elidible VAU_elidible free*)* / ter= ms >> GOhA_elidible VAU_elidible free* >> >> sentence =3D terms? bridi_tail_t1 (joik_jek bridi_tail / joik_jek stag? >> KE_clause free* bridi_tail KEhE_elidible free*)* / COhE_fragment >> >> Thus only COhE_fragment can be a sentence, and the structure of >> COhE_fragment is limited only to {mi zo'u ca ma}, {mi ije ma} and {mi dj= ica >> lo nu lo plise}. >> > > I wonder whether it wouldn't be more elegant to eliminate COhE_fragment > and make the "selbri" of a bridi-tail elidable instead. Something like: > > bridi-tail-3 <- selbri? tail-terms / gek-sentence > Hard for me to determine what is the cause but this breaks {mi zo'u mi mo}. > At some point there was talk of making the selbri of a sumti-tail elidabl= e > as well, so that "lo ku" would be a valid sumti. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "BPFK" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --001a11c381ce58dc61051240864b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2015-03-27 3:02 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com= >:


On Thu, Mar 26= , 2015 at 4:30 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com= > wrote:
2015-03-26 1:04 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb= =C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
On Wed= , Mar 25, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail= .com> wrote:

=
E.g.=C2=A0I suppose COhE_elidible should be inserted to more construct= s. but I haven't looked at where it can be done. What else apart from w= hat has been done can be autocorrected to bridi status?

Every fragment can. For example instead of = fragment "ek" you could have "KOhA_elidable ek KOhA_elidable= COhE.elidable", where KOhA_elidable could return "ZOhE".=C2= =A0

Not sure= I would use that. How would this work for joik? {joi} fragment could be un= derstood both as {zo'e joi zo'e co'e} and as {co'e joi co&#= 39;e}

"= joi" can't be a fragment though. The reason is that it would clash= with the sentence connective ".i joi". Fragment is a weird rule,= I would happily remove relative clauses, links and linkargs from it. I don= 't think fragment "na" is used much either.
=

What methods do you use or want to m= ake the development process happen faster?
A web tool that would = allow to insert a complete PEG file, compile it and test it online?


=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2= =A0
Okay, then I'll add
fragment = =3D COhE_fragment / ek free* / gihek free* / quantifier / (NA_clause !JA_cl= ause free*)+ / relative_clauses / links / linkargs

COhE= _fragment =3D prenex (terms GOhA_elidible VAU_elidible free*)* / terms GOhA= _elidible VAU_elidible free*

sentence =3D= terms? bridi_tail_t1 (joik_jek bridi_tail / joik_jek stag? KE_clause free*= bridi_tail KEhE_elidible free*)* / COhE_fragment

Thus only COhE_fragment can be a sentence, and the structure of COhE_= fragment is limited only to {mi zo'u ca ma}, {mi ije ma} and {mi djica = lo nu lo plise}.

=
I wonder whether it wouldn't be more elegant to eliminate COhE_fra= gment and make the "selbri" of a bridi-tail elidable instead. Som= ething like:

=C2=A0bridi-tail-3 <- selbri? tail-terms / gek-sentence=

Hard for me= to determine what is the cause but this breaks {mi zo'u mi mo}.
<= div>


At some point there was talk of = making the selbri of a sumti-tail elidable as well, so that "lo ku&quo= t; would be a valid sumti.

mu'o m= i'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list= +unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at ht= tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--001a11c381ce58dc61051240864b--