From rspeer@MIT.EDU Sun May 09 17:07:14 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 09 May 2004 17:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu ([18.7.21.83])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.31)
	id 1BMyK3-0007bq-Hm
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:07:07 -0700
Received: from central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (CENTRAL-CITY-CARRIER-STATION.MIT.EDU [18.7.7.72])
	by pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id i4A075LM010480
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Sun, 9 May 2004 20:07:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (MELBOURNE-CITY-STREET.MIT.EDU [18.7.21.86])
	by central-city-carrier-station.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.9.2) with ESMTP id i4A075YK028426
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Sun, 9 May 2004 20:07:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from torg.mit.edu (TORG.MIT.EDU [18.208.0.57])
	)
	by melbourne-city-street.mit.edu (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id i4A074Fk029463
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Sun, 9 May 2004 20:07:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rob by torg.mit.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BMyK6-0005Kn-00
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Sun, 09 May 2004 20:07:10 -0400
Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 20:07:10 -0400
From: Rob Speer <rspeer@MIT.EDU>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: my new idea for onomato's
Message-ID: <20040510000710.GA20485@mit.edu>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <c7mefj+h2t8@eGroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <c7mefj+h2t8@eGroups.com>
X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
X-archive-position: 7730
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rspeer@MIT.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 11:22:27PM -0000, la_okus wrote:
> ok, I made a thread a while back about onomatopoeias. I've come up 
> with a new idea for how a computer can parse them unambiguously:
> 
> Define sa'ei as "everything following this cmavo is an onomatopoeia 
> until it repeats". This allows you to make the word without regard 
> to cmene rules. And onomatopoeias are usually found in repeated 
> pairs anyway (especially japanese ones: gero-gero, ira-ira, gocha-
> gocha).
> 
> Would this be parsable? sa'ei mumu?

Not easily. This makes the language not at all context-free. And to
parse such a phrase, you have to maintain an arbirtrarily large stack.

Besides, how is doubling the word any better than adding a consonant to
it? The only advantage seems to be cuteness.

-- 
Rob Speer