Re: [lojban] Re: Official parser problem?

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:34:09PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell scripsit:
> 
> > To parse: "lo'u mi le'u si lo'u mi le'u"       
> > 
> > You do step "c" of the preprocessing                         
> > 
> > LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU si LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU   
> > 
> > 
> > LOhU any_words_697{mi} LOhU any_words_697{mi} LEhU           
> 
> So far so good.  But this is ungrammatical, because between LOhU and
> LEhU you have three tokens, and only one is permitted, which must be
> an any_words_697.
> 
> > Now, theoretically this is one big, long lo'u...le'u string.
> 
> Nope.  It's OK for a "lo'u...le'u" string to contain a "lo'u" *word*,
> but what you have here is a "lo'u" *token*.
> 
> > But the grammar as writen will not accomodate it.
> 
> Rightly so.

.o'onaisai

You're glorifying an accident of the technology that was used to make
the grammar!

No actual Lojban speaker would go, "Gee, I seem to have a lo'u token in
my input, not a lo'u word.  I better give up.".

Quite frankly, I'm stunned that you are actually supporting such an
asinine position.

-Robin

-- 
Me: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/  ***   I'm a *male* Robin.
"Constant neocortex override is the only thing that stops us all
from running out and eating all the cookies."  -- Eliezer Yudkowsky
http://www.lojban.org/             ***              .i cimo'o prali .ui