From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Wed Mar 17 17:40:04 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:40:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.30)
	id 1B3mVq-0003zP-Gj
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:39:58 -0800
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:39:58 -0800
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Official parser problem?
Message-ID: <20040318013958.GK11847@digitalkingdom.org>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org
References: <20040317222428.GZ11847@digitalkingdom.org> <20040318011211.GH11847@digitalkingdom.org> <20040318012328.GI11847@digitalkingdom.org> <20040318013409.GB12076@ccil.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040318013409.GB12076@ccil.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
From: Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>
X-archive-position: 7236
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:34:09PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
> 
> > To parse: "lo'u mi le'u si lo'u mi le'u"       
> > 
> > You do step "c" of the preprocessing                         
> > 
> > LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU si LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU   
> > 
> > 
> > LOhU any_words_697{mi} LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU           
> 
> So far so good.  But this is ungrammatical, because between LOhU and
> LEhU you have three tokens, and only one is permitted, which must be
> an any_words_697.
> 
> > Now, theoretically this is one big, long lo'u...le'u string.
> 
> Nope.  It's OK for a "lo'u...le'u" string to contain a "lo'u" *word*,
> but what you have here is a "lo'u" *token*.
> 
> > But the grammar as writen will not accomodate it.
> 
> Rightly so.

.o'onaisai

You're glorifying an accident of the technology that was used to make
the grammar!

No actual Lojban speaker would go, "Gee, I seem to have a lo'u token in
my input, not a lo'u word.  I better give up.".

Quite frankly, I'm stunned that you are actually supporting such an
asinine position.

-Robin

-- 
Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/  ***   I'm a *male* Robin.
"Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all
from running out and eating all the cookies."  -- Eliezer Yudkowsky
http://www.lojban.org/             ***              .i cimo'o prali .ui