From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhCJksTlBBoE6VA4qg@googlegroups.com Sat Oct 09 17:30:18 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P4jnp-0003OS-OZ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:18 -0700 Received: by yxk30 with SMTP id 30sf2416725yxk.16 for ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :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:content-type; bh=3uxuc0QWuz/YPA8J51gpVhew3wUkpKwMGOyE0iLgiYE=; b=iwOY5Xq20fM7Y/uuJXLgPBpcIPoOkNZbSHBhXRmV4GAzZw9Y61DuXETRBUb5yjo6/g +ubmeEzoW1mkQMiLnWso7i3r+Whu7XhPvE+CroYHR1+m1l5vujaQK9ma56lQHGcHbOK0 o8eF45pVeZJC08+Q2D9aLe7HCqZNov7RkOzjM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to: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:content-type; b=TSmayij/p+xfqrPGbE0Dp/kcgVx6SguU5DtLl79gdGJSfewOVXFtOcS99rokU7CIUs XWqEn6TgLCvWibRDMZc1NJXDaxN8evmuToO5u0444DHeTTaYDtbOedC7PQVStTbQUwF6 wNjvtTEkgnbJJLLaHIgkBRuwBgSHJOapuDeu4= Received: by 10.91.161.20 with SMTP id n20mr332217ago.34.1286670601752; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.180.73 with SMTP id bt9ls1018906ibb.0.p; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.192.73 with SMTP id dp9mr1247205ibb.16.1286670601248; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.192.73 with SMTP id dp9mr1247204ibb.16.1286670601213; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com (mail-iw0-f169.google.com [209.85.214.169]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id e4si3271194ibc.4.2010.10.09.17.30.00; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.169; Received: by iwn1 with SMTP id 1so2831276iwn.0 for ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:30:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.183.67 with SMTP id cf3mr3577796ibb.187.1286670599996; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.68 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Oct 2010 17:29:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100903032539.GY5990@digitalkingdom.org> <8136604407292225759@unknownmsgid> <6632159152572093565@unknownmsgid> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 18:29:59 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work From: Jonathan Jones To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016363b8b3c0e472d0492385875 --0016363b8b3c0e472d0492385875 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/10/9 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > > 2010/10/9 Jorge Llamb=EDas > >> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Daniel Brockman > >> wrote: > >> >> If it's an existing selma'o, then either UI or BAhE are the best > >> >> choices, I think. Even they will fail if the first speaker ends wit= h > ZO or > >> >> ZEI though, because you wouldn't be able to complete with what you > really > >> >> want to complete. You would need to use some additional trick with > SI. > [...] > > I thought the working of the "continue jufra" cmavo was that it would b= e > > removed from the result, so that > > I was talking about the case where they were in UI or BAhE. It > wouldn't belong to any selma'o if it is going to be stripped away > before parsing. > > > > A: la'e di'u smuni zo > > B: di'ai blablabla > > > > becomes > > > > la'edi'u smuni zo blablabla > > > > If di'ai deletes itself, the problem would be keeping it from doing so, > not > > what you're describing. > > I suppose the problem still exists for B if they want to repent of it > once they uttered it, since "di'ai" would be invisible to "si". Or > maybe "di'ai si" can also be part of the pre-parsing process. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > Or they could immediately say nai, since di'ainai would mean "explicitly NO= T continuing". --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi luk. mi patfu d= o zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den. --0016363b8b3c0e472d0492385875 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010/10/9 Jorge Llamb=EDas <= ;jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/9 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
>> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Daniel Brockman <dbrockman@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> If it's an existing selma'o, then either UI or BA= hE are the best
>> >> choices, I think. Even they will fail if the first speake= r ends with ZO or
>> >> ZEI though, because you wouldn't be able to complete = with what you really
>> >> want to complete. You would need to use some additional t= rick with SI.
[...]
> I thought the working of the "continue ju= fra" cmavo was that it would be
> removed from the result, so that

I was talking about the case where they were in UI or BAhE. It
wouldn't belong to any selma'o if it is going to be stripped away before parsing.


> A: la'e di'u smuni zo
> B: di'ai blablabla
>
> becomes
>
> la'edi'u smuni zo blablabla
>
> If di'ai deletes itself, the problem would be keeping it from doin= g so, not
> what you're describing.

I suppose the problem still exists for B if they want to repent of it=
once they uttered it, since "di'ai" would be invisible to &qu= ot;si". Or
maybe "di'ai si" can also be part of the pre-parsing process.=

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Or t= hey could immediately say nai, since di'ainai would mean "explicit= ly NOT continuing".

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe 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 "= BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
--0016363b8b3c0e472d0492385875--