Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P4jUa-0001kH-Gc; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:23 -0700 Received: by wyb40 with SMTP id 40sf533482wyb.16 for ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:14 -0700 (PDT) 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:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=PEUklV+p1tITtWyq7IhGqYMXuALUJzLolZi/WGPx8Kc=; b=Oneah1UkLURuQLWu8yyrwFe2iWSqwGgtAh/Zb9i05aD+5AEhwwnvqDV28TBsHQKEom wgJE8mWAzO4ZMGi7ipE8SBmbcdRlxbLxzH10YE90niaFlLLhfeyKSkozLQwVxX8FD91N 012eA04o06Ll9ppjUtzhbu3kfsokoBAYCTc8o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=fYc6DSPrzi3wTBVCjKsv0qtfH5lYzQoCx1xC9r154mf48FMhm6MdbC8gsbpuqwcZXk 2ibVEfsa2OLL6xE/dlwYz0DOfd40ras206CWwgSKF/jxy9T1OZQjFy26y093RUdZY+TS A3QzSQ8kLKMQyyT2T+kBM3MKUye9HkrZKuRdM= Received: by 10.216.145.132 with SMTP id p4mr723374wej.20.1286669407652; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.3.19 with SMTP id 19ls752056wbl.3.p; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.144.207 with SMTP id a15mr183828wbv.15.1286669406590; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.144.207 with SMTP id a15mr183827wbv.15.1286669406534; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f169.google.com (mail-wy0-f169.google.com [74.125.82.169]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id k12si1697796weq.11.2010.10.09.17.10.05; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.169; Received: by mail-wy0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 40so100972wyb.14 for ; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.134.194 with SMTP id k2mr4200911wbt.86.1286669405348; Sat, 09 Oct 2010 17:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.130 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Oct 2010 17:10:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20100903032539.GY5990@digitalkingdom.org> <8136604407292225759@unknownmsgid> <6632159152572093565@unknownmsgid> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 21:10:05 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Length: 1545 On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > 2010/10/9 Jorge Llamb=EDas >> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Daniel Brockman >> wrote: >> >> If it's an existing selma'o, then either UI or BAhE are the best >> >> choices, I think. Even they will fail if the first speaker ends with = ZO or >> >> ZEI though, because you wouldn't be able to complete with what you re= ally >> >> want to complete. You would need to use some additional trick with SI= . [...] > I thought the working of the "continue jufra" cmavo was that it would be > removed from the result, so that I was talking about the case where they were in UI or BAhE. It wouldn't belong to any selma'o if it is going to be stripped away before parsing. > A: la'e di'u smuni zo > B: di'ai blablabla > > becomes > > la'edi'u smuni zo blablabla > > If di'ai deletes itself, the problem would be keeping it from doing so, n= ot > what you're describing. I suppose the problem still exists for B if they want to repent of it once they uttered it, since "di'ai" would be invisible to "si". Or maybe "di'ai si" can also be part of the pre-parsing process. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.