[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bpfk] extended rafsi and a tosmabru/slinku'i boondoggle



On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Alex Burka <durka42@gmail.com> wrote:
This word came up on IRC today:

?{.esporte'yske}

(Assume for the sake of argument that the extended rafsi stress fix, noted recently by la xorxes, has been applied.)

Now, camxes says this is a tosmabru: *{.e sporte'yske}. Note that {sporte'yske} by itself _does_ parse. It is a lujvo formed from *{sporte} and {saske}. But *{sporte} is a slinku'i! So how can it show up in a lujvo?

Is this a limitation of extended rafsi (we can't really make a lujvo including a fu'ivla whose first consonant cluster is a valid initial cluster, or something along those lines), or is it a bug in the grammar?

It's just a bug. The extended rafsi part of the morphology was never thoroughly tested, so it's good that people are starting to look at it. This *may* be the fix:
 
rafsi-string <- y-less-rafsi* (gismu / CVV-final-rafsi / stressed-y-less-rafsi short-final-rafsi / y-rafsi / stressed-y-rafsi / stressed-y-less-rafsi? initial-pair y) / brivla-rafsi

Adding the "/ brivla-rafsi" at the end. I'd be grateful if you can check it.

ki'e mi'e xorxes





--
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.
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.