Received: from localhost ([::1]:46251 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TyiD6-0007mE-7P; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 04:16:44 -0800 Received: from mail-da0-f52.google.com ([209.85.210.52]:45110) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TyiCy-0007m4-56 for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 04:16:42 -0800 Received: by mail-da0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f10so148625dak.25 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 04:16:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=NasQGRCOP+d2TnoEYGYR/hA+mIsUE3qTND670i7kh+I=; b=Hzo5mrP/IxYKm0oGfgHb2mZP9BHWslYN22TmH1/goYMKy03Isqi+LX4qdS73930o9l AGThSpNCwZWU/lNKDDK7WPpynoM8deEQXQUeS/GCVPmSi84WRNpoFRO+DWFgo83Tyziy muhn1rqdO7U52v3bMUYQ1Tg1x/2WJywEwjyD7yLjY+QipynMdn3ER2FCq8uUFBcKlAHM uIyGLp2JvPoiBhdF7ZtNfNqGFAyIpft+xrkJM1mfhUpl4ZaxYD5CckTqsHfzHv0LzbVi Qp3GfCN2mAkGNT2oLoEcTdSOec4dQ5l4iGbnCXmaphL5elgldXUsff5p93nWsUEUGCsA fbUg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.85.73 with SMTP id f9mr980352paz.13.1359116189858; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 04:16:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.66.233.225 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 04:16:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20130124221349.GB20636@mercury.ccil.org> References: <20130124175134.GA14317@mercury.ccil.org> <51017FF7.504@plasmatix.com> <20130124221349.GB20636@mercury.ccil.org> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:16:29 -0300 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / Subject: Re: [jbovlaste] berbere, berberi X-BeenThere: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: jbovlaste-bounces@lojban.org On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM, John Cowan wrote: > selpa'i scripsit: > >> The PEG assigns rafsi to all fu'ivla, but even if you don't like the >> PEG morphology, the CLL itself proposes fu'ivla rafsi for fu'ivla of >> the form CCV'VCV: > > The reason that was just a proposal is that we could never prove that > decompositions were unambiguous. Surely that can't have been the reason. How did you prove that decompositions with CCVCy- rafsi were unambiguous, and why wouldn't the same method of proof work for CCVVCy-? The proof seems just as easy. > Note that a PEG grammar, unlike a YACC > grammar, does not prove this, because PEG grammars silently override > ambiguities using the rule "first = best". That isn't good enough for > Lojban morphology, so I consider the CLL proposal a dead letter. The YACC grammar doesn't handle morphology at all, so I fail to see how this has anything to do with the issue. If the PEG morphology isn't good enough for Lojban, then Lojban doesn't have a formal morphology at all, because the PEG is the only one we have so far. mu'o mi'e xorxes _______________________________________________ jbovlaste mailing list jbovlaste@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste