Received: from mail-qc0-f191.google.com ([209.85.216.191]:34180) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1YdOIs-0004RO-Px; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:28:01 -0700 Received: by qcrw7 with SMTP id w7sf9018189qcr.1; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :content-type: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; bh=idophXBg8duD1C/gH/l1Ypjjdylk9AWr8rVJZ0eAkGA=; b=kaj1w41WK1m18NAw8vutc2NLexFp3rJp+ydKXRKO8QjJjb7+6kpuK9FMUovLPnlECo 8R9XEtBYSHbF6vD5XIS9wZOgIuKsmm+dJxdxcUfvoLoXoWWGnBzKlGfv1QzTS0vuk/B7 SplkL2ZkOGmNrWqMIEMnqPaJF6Wnc/sRAKGaeNHiQ7D8kndLRIRwFlcIV8KP93tNMZ3M fcXo2Ge+a8G7U/B6OmHA9G0PymfXvvvc/xV1gDzMcPDKFn57wVC0oDm3E8K0LlVxqWgi 5p03gNH6jPEbM/SFWahyw4IUeO7m7WiZLyU3spjkdMweeObdsGrq3lOuSY9/GO3kekSm UZng== X-Received: by 10.182.96.102 with SMTP id dr6mr390959obb.33.1427916468466; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.230.75 with SMTP id sw11ls174180obc.63.gmail; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.116.230 with SMTP id jz6mr16059992obb.2.1427916468219; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-x231.google.com (mail-qc0-x231.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z4si537213qcf.0.2015.04.01.12.27.48 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of durka42@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231; Received: by mail-qc0-x231.google.com with SMTP id y5so49797652qca.1 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.55.21.3 with SMTP id f3mr45912242qkh.96.1427916467332; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [2607:f470:6:400d:1400::] ([2607:f470:6:400d:d5b7:6305:258a:f213]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id m49sm1895678qgd.44.2015.04.01.12.27.46 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 15:27:45 -0400 From: Alex Burka To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Message-ID: <1542A73D520E49BDB44789AB54497FDC@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [bpfk] selma'o ZEhEI and PEG X-Mailer: sparrow 1.6.4 (build 1178) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="551c46b1_7365f1ee_14c" X-Original-Sender: durka42@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of durka42@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c01::231 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=durka42@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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: X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_bar: - Content-Length: 12217 --551c46b1_7365f1ee_14c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hmm, I don't know about this. I definitely see the motivation to avoid modi= fying a bunch of parser rules (though what xorxes wrote really isn't that m= any), but I'm not sure that MAI matches. A ((number / lerfu-string) MAI-cla= use) is just an indicator, which binds to the previous word. So if you writ= e {zo'e bu ze'ei pa} with ze'ei in MAI, then it parses as {((zo'e bu) ze'ei= ) pa}, with the zo'ebuze'ei attached to whatever precedes, rather than the = {pa}. Then to match the semantics to the grammar you'd want to swap the ord= er of {ze'ei} and make it {pa zo'e bu ze'ei}. Thoughts? =20 - mu'o mi'e durkavore =20 On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 4:59 AM, guskant wrote: > =20 > =20 > Le mercredi 1 avril 2015 15:24:08 UTC+9, la gleki a =C3=A9crit : > > That still adds a lot of strings to the grammar. > > Can you think of a better way with a different grammar that will allow = us to glue semantics from one word and grammar from another word? > > =20 > > =20 > > 2015-04-01 2:45 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : > > > =20 > > > gleki asked about incorporating selma'o ZEhEI to PEG and I said it wo= uld require modifying lots and lots of rules, basically all the selma'o rul= es. But maybe not. > > > =20 > > > I was thinking of ZEhEI as being similar to ZEI, but that's probably = not the best way to think about it. ZEhEI is actually much more like BU. Th= e only difference is that instead of creating something like BY, it creates= something like BAhE. So we only need to do for ZEhEI wrt to BAhE what we d= o for BU wrt to BY. > > > =20 > > > This is still not trivial, because BU interacts with ZEI in weird way= s, and now we'd be adding a third ingredient into the mix, which makes it a= ll even more messy. But the required modifications would probably look some= thing like this: > > > =20 > > > zehei-clause <- pre-clause zehei-clause-no-pre zehei-clause-no-pre <-= pre-zei-bu (zehei-tail? zei-tail / zehei-tail? bu-tail)* zehei-tail post-c= lause > > > zei-clause-no-pre <- pre-zei-bu (zei-tail? bu-tail / zei-tail? zehei-= tail)* zei-tail post-clause bu-clause-no-pre <- pre-zei-bu (bu-tail? zei-ta= il / bu-tail? zehei-tail)* bu-tail post-clause > > > =20 > > > =20 > > > zehei-tail <- ZEhEI-clause+ > > > pre-zei-bu <- (!ZEhEI-clause !BU-clause !ZEI-clause !SI-clause !SA-cl= ause !SU-clause !FAhO-clause any-word-SA-handling) si-clause? =20 > > > ; turns any word into a BAhE modifier =20 > > > ZEhEI-clause <- ZEhEI-pre ZEhEI-post ZEhEI-pre <- pre-clause ZEhEI sp= aces? ZEhEI-post <- spaces? > > > ; next word intensifier BAhE-clause <- (BAhE-pre BAhE-post)+ / zehei-= clause+ BAhE-pre <- BAhE spaces? BAhE-post <- si-clause? !ZEI-clause !BU-cl= ause !ZEhEI-clause > > > =20 > > > =20 > > > I haven't tested any of this, and it may require further tweaking, bu= t that's the general idea. It may also be necessary to add !ZEhEI-clause wh= erever there's a !ZEI-clause !BU-clause, but I suspect many of those are ac= tually redundant. > > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > > =20 > > > =20 > > > =20 > > =20 > > =20 > > =20 > =20 > I prefer abandoning the selma'o ZEhEI and adopting a cmavo compound of BU= +MAI instead. It would be simple to let {ze'ei} be of selma'o MAI. > =20 > For example, the definition of {xo'e} =20 > http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/xo'e > is currently =20 > =20 > zo'e ze'ei pa > =20 > Let's modify it as follows: > =20 > zo'e bu ze'ei pa > =20 > and change the selma'o for {ze'ei} to MAI. =20 > =20 > -- =20 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= "BPFK" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an= email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscr= ibe@googlegroups.com). > To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com (mailto:b= pfk-list@googlegroups.com). > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. --551c46b1_7365f1ee_14c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
Hmm, I don't know about this. I definitely see the moti= vation to avoid modifying a bunch of parser rules (though what xorxes wrote= really isn't that many), but I'm not sure that MAI matches. A ((number / l= erfu-string) MAI-clause) is just an indicator, which binds to the previous = word. So if you write {zo'e bu ze'ei pa} with ze'ei in MAI, then it parses = as {((zo'e bu) ze'ei) pa}, with the zo'ebuze'ei attached to whatever preced= es, rather than the {pa}. Then to match the semantics to the grammar you'd = want to swap the order of {ze'ei} and make it {pa zo'e bu ze'ei}. Thoughts?

- mu'o mi'e durkavore
=20

On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at= 4:59 AM, guskant wrote:



Le mercredi 1 = avril 2015 15:24:08 UTC+9, la gleki a =C3=A9crit :
That still adds a lot of strings to the grammar= .
Can you think of a better way with a different grammar that will allo= w us to glue semantics from one word and grammar from another word?

2015-04-01 2:45 GMT+03:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjlla...@gmail.com>:
<= blockquote style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-le= ft:1ex">

gleki asked about incorporating selma'o Z= EhEI to PEG and I said it would require modifying lots and lots of rules, b= asically all the selma'o rules. But maybe not.

I w= as thinking of ZEhEI as being similar to ZEI, but that's probably not the b= est way to think about it. ZEhEI is actually much more like BU. The only di= fference is that instead of creating something like BY, it creates somethin= g like BAhE. So we only need to do for ZEhEI wrt to BAhE what we do for BU = wrt to BY.

This is still not trivial, because BU i= nteracts with ZEI in weird ways, and now we'd be adding a third ingredient = into the mix, which makes it all even more messy. But the required modifica= tions would probably look something like this:

zehei-clause <- pre-clause zehei= -clause-no-pre zehei-clause-no-pre <- pre-zei-bu (zehei-tail? zei-tail / zehei-tail? bu= -tail)* zehei-tail post-clause
zei-cla=
use-no-pre <- pre-zei-bu (zei-tail? bu-tail / zei-tail? zehei-tail)* zei=
-tail post-clause

bu-clause-no-pre <- pre-zei-bu (bu-tail? zei-tail / bu-tail? zehei-tail)=
* bu-tail post-clause
zehei-tail <- ZEhEI-clause+
pre-zei-bu <- (!ZEhEI-claus=
e !BU-clause !ZEI-clause !SI-clause !SA-clause !SU-clause !FAhO-clause any-=
word-SA-handling) si-clause?

;       =
  turns any word into a BAhE modifier 
ZEhEI-clause <- ZEhEI-pre ZEhEI-post
ZEhEI-pre <- pre-clause ZEhEI spaces?
ZEhEI-post <- spaces?
;         next word intensifie=
r =20
BAhE-clause <- (BAhE-pre BAhE-post)+ / zehei-clause+
BAhE-pre <- BAhE spaces?
BAhE-post <- si-clause? !ZEI-clause !BU-clause !ZEhEI-clause
I haven't tested an=
y of this, and it may require further tweaking, but that's the general idea=
. It may also be necessary to add !ZEhEI-clause wherever there's a !ZEI-cla=
use !BU-clause, but I suspect many of those are actually redundant.<=
/pre>
mu'o mi'e xorxes
=

<= /blockquote>

I prefer abandoning the selma'o ZEhEI and a= dopting a cmavo compound of BU+MAI instead. It would be simple to let {ze'e= i} be of selma'o MAI.

For example, the definition = of {xo'e} 
is currently 

zo'e ze'ei pa

Let's modify i= t as follows:

zo'e bu ze'ei pa

and change the selma'o for {ze'ei} to MAI. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list= +unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at ht= tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20

=20

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list= +unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at ht= tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--551c46b1_7365f1ee_14c--