From cowan@ccil.org Thu May 13 20:48:00 2004 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 3307 invoked from network); 14 May 2004 03:48:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 May 2004 03:48:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 May 2004 03:47:59 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BOTfv-00043c-Nj for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 13 May 2004 20:47:55 -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 4.32) id 1BOTfF-00042n-Oc; Thu, 13 May 2004 20:47:13 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 13 May 2004 20:47:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercury.ccil.org ([192.190.237.100]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA:16) (Exim 4.32) id 1BOTf3-00042N-BC for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 20:47:02 -0700 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BOTir-0005px-Li for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 13 May 2004 23:50:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 23:50:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20040514035057.GD18460@ccil.org> References: <20040513213804.GG16333@fysh.org> <20040513214744.GA4461@digitalkingdom.org> <20040513222637.GI16333@fysh.org> <20040513224341.GF4461@digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040513224341.GF4461@digitalkingdom.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-archive-position: 7833 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: cowan@ccil.org X-list: lojban-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134 From: John Cowan Reply-To: cowan@ccil.org Subject: [lojban] Re: erasure words X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=212516 X-Yahoo-Profile: johnwcowan X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 22296 Robin Lee Powell scripsit: > Not with just sa, no, but "sa le si si" will do it in my parser. I > agree that that's a bit bulky, though. The original intention of "sa" was to erase the current partial sentence. Typically you'd follow "sa" with ".i", although it wasn't necessary under the original rules. I got the clever idea of extending the usability of "sa" by allowing it to erase back to the beginning of the current constituent, where the next cmavo told you what the "current constituent" was. Imperfect but useful. If you have "le le broda ku brode sa sa le brodi", what does that do currently? Do you handle repeated sa's at all? > 2. I honestly don't think that you understand how hard a problem Lojban > grammar is to implement. > > WRT point #2: John Cowan, please accept my apology; you were right. > (John said the same thing to me when I started worknig on this). /me chuckles. Think nothing of it. -- Ambassador Trentino: I've said enough. I'm a man of few words. Rufus T. Firefly: I'm a man of one word: scram! --Duck Soup John Cowan