From lojban+bncCP_9gZ7IFhDNsJroBBoE4t4TSg@googlegroups.com Mon Dec 13 14:04:18 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PSGV5-0003wn-Hw; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:04:18 -0800 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34sf5299307wwb.16 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:04:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id :x-spam_score:x-spam_score_int:x-spam_bar:x-spam_report :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=/ywmPKYb82+J/xJdV9JdlsndoeBwAyoguTbHcOt4+W8=; b=YcHpBu5GBlqODoOlhu5dOJzlm9rPKtSQsPNuV4COSuTvlK/FwkQ1keX2nKmEooI75c akp4OU4RtCwpy+wYiHOXxcFsjkA70YAmfk/SME5YdSJEnAdFJ6986bFnkZj8fiG/v0eK RBTg/5VDnh1AXlOuPowGN7vaTqpTumrQOPoVs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id:x-spam_score :x-spam_score_int:x-spam_bar:x-spam_report:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=icrNfqxPCv6SG61B/sd3m0DaKUlp8N22BQq3uJtANP10Ugl14SrEeNcn/tT8Npu3Fj s+8C1G1O3Y4Q6xqH7YDE9oHeCKXlKgX1h3rvhT4Tr8MtKr/SXzxsiz2ODwhoF34ITNSd lzJy0bbAV4lSaYh8GcRdscsS0qlDchAj+jF2E= Received: by 10.216.12.140 with SMTP id 12mr381064wez.11.1292277837056; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:03:57 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.226.148 with SMTP id b20ls2590264weq.0.p; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:03:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.29.134 with SMTP id i6mr333942wea.9.1292277836081; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:03:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.29.134 with SMTP id i6mr333941wea.9.1292277836015; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:03:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from narnia.blumen-schwarz.de (narnia.blumen-schwarz.de [80.190.195.21]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id a52si747469wer.0.2010.12.13.14.03.55; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:03:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 80.190.195.21 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of roman_naumann@fastmail.fm) client-ip=80.190.195.21; Received: from brln-4db9d7fb.pool.mediaways.net ([77.185.215.251] helo=kira.localnet) by narnia.blumen-schwarz.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PSGUq-0005kh-58 for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 13 Dec 2010 23:03:55 +0100 From: Roman Naumann Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Lojban CFG Questions Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 23:03:50 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-ARCH; KDE/4.5.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <201012101024.39320.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> <201012132232.19813.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> <20101213213841.GF7300@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20101213213841.GF7300@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201012132303.51200.roman_naumann@fastmail.fm> X-Spam_score: -1.0 X-Spam_score_int: -9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system LifeNet Mailserver, has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see support@life.de for details. Content preview: On Monday 13 December 2010 22:38:42 Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:32:19PM +0100, Roman Naumann wrote: > > The hard part is actually situations in which removing a terminator > makes it not parse at all, which the toy doesn't have. Example in > real Lojban: {nu le klama ku broda}; if you take the "ku" out that > breaks because {klama broda} is a tanru, which is higher precendence > than inserting the elidablue ku, and with the tanru the nu has no > selbri. To tweak the toy language to have this, I think allowing > {klama klama} as a tanru with high precedence should be sufficient. [...] Content analysis details: (-1.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is freemail (roman_naumann[at]fastmail.fm) X-Original-Sender: roman_naumann@fastmail.fm X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 80.190.195.21 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of roman_naumann@fastmail.fm) smtp.mail=roman_naumann@fastmail.fm Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Monday 13 December 2010 22:38:42 Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:32:19PM +0100, Roman Naumann wrote: > > The hard part is actually situations in which removing a terminator > makes it not parse at all, which the toy doesn't have. Example in > real Lojban: {nu le klama ku broda}; if you take the "ku" out that > breaks because {klama broda} is a tanru, which is higher precendence > than inserting the elidablue ku, and with the tanru the nu has no > selbri. To tweak the toy language to have this, I think allowing > {klama klama} as a tanru with high precedence should be sufficient. I see, i'll remember that point. The sample grammar (acc. to my interpretation) has several places, where eliding terminators - even though not break - change the parse tree. According to my interpretation, we can leave out "ku" as long as a "klama" follows without anything else (such as "mi") inbetween, except "ku", which is allowed. Examples are: 1.: {lenu klama lenu klama mi ku ku klama} 2.: {lenu klama lenu klama ku mi ku klama} 3.: {lenu klama lenu klama ku ku mi klama} 1: we can leave out either or both "ku" without changing the parse tree. 2: we can only leave out the latter "ku", else "mi" becomes part of the inner sentence. 3: we cannot leave out any "ku". If we leave out one, "mi" is in the inner sentence; if we leave out both, "mi" belongs to the innermost sentence. The grammar produces correct parse trees according to this interpretation and the three points above. I didn't look at 'nu' and a whole bunch of other selma'o yet, though, and it's way to early to get excited about anything. I'll look into a lot of problems soon, but the next few days i'll be something between rather busy with real-life issues. (- still, christmas holidays with plenty of time are near). Regards, Roman -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.