Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0pxU8T-00006TC; Sun, 1 May 94 08:32 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8555; Sun, 01 May 94 08:32:16 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8553; Sun, 1 May 1994 08:32:16 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8664; Sun, 1 May 1994 07:30:42 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 1994 13:11:23 +0100 Reply-To: Colin Fine Sender: Lojban list From: Colin Fine Subject: Re: afterthought logical connection To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 892 Lines: 22 My immediate thought was, as you suggested, stick in a "ke'e" and let the grammar invent the "ke" retrospectively. I thought about a solution which looped round in the grammar so that one of the options for tanru-unit was "selbri-3 KEhE", but I suspect that this is not only not LALR(1) but is not even LALR(n). I then thought about introducing an elidable terminator on some selbri-n, but that doesn't help either, because in the example 'sampymau binxo' is a selbri-3, but you want to make it into a selbri-5 in order to be able to joik-jek it. So I'm also stuck. It seems to me that we can make sense of shoving an afterthought ke'e in (but note that we will have little freedom as to the scope - it will have to go back to the start of the selbri, or maybe the start of the selbri-3), but I can't see a way to get the grammar to accept it. Elidable initiators anybody? zo'osai Colin