Message-Id: <199511251351.IAA06672@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:37:31 -0500
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      lu'u
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR

And:
>But surely one gardenpaths on that. That is, you'd parse it as
>
>   by e [lua dy] e gy
>
>until you hit {luu}, and then I guess you'd have to backtrack.  Or is
>there some quirk of the grammar of LUhU that says it's not elidable
>before a sumti connective, so that if you want [lua dy] then you'd have
>to say:
>
>   by e lua dy luu e gy
>
>? And the terminators are not elidable in
>
>   by e lua lae dy luu e gy luu ne zy

The nature of LR1 in Lojban is such that given a choice between short
and long scope, we must always choose long scope because there is no way
in afterthought to extend scope.  Thus the moment you see the ".e" you
know that the lu'a has not terminated.  As a result, i think you correct
that the lu'us are required in order to get the parse you want.

lojbab