From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun May 09 17:08:17 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 84034 invoked from network); 10 May 2004 00:08:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 May 2004 00:08:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 May 2004 00:08:16 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.31) id 1BMyKn-0007cZ-Nc for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:07:53 -0700 Received: from dsl081-049-134.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.49.134] helo=chain.digitalkingdom.org) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.31) id 1BMyKC-0007c3-Ss; Sun, 09 May 2004 17:07:16 -0700 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 ; 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 ; 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 ; 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 ; Sun, 09 May 2004 20:07:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 20:07:10 -0400 Message-ID: <20040510000710.GA20485@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-list@lojban.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-From: Rob Speer From: Rob Speer Reply-To: rspeer@MIT.EDU Subject: [lojban] Re: my new idea for onomato's X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 22193 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