[lojban] Re: CMENE=BRIVLA (was Re: Opinions on "mi viska le sa .i mi cusku zo .djan.")

[Robin Lee Powell <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 05:17:46AM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> --- Jordan DeLong <fracture@allusion.net> wrote:
> > The extra 3 syllables in that sentence are certainly going to be
> > more than paid for by all the elided {cu} in the rest of whatever
> > text/conversation is going on.
> 
> But I'm not saying putting CMENE in BRIVLA will save you syllables.
> It will just make the grammar simpler.

I, for one, have no concern at all about the simplicity of the grammar
as long as it is well-formalized.  But then, I am probably much too deep
into the trees to see the forest.

> Another place where it would require an extra ku is in
> {la alis joi mi}. Robin, will your parser be capable of 
> dealing with {le broda joi mi}?

Of course.  Any wart that can be attributed to LR(1) limitations should
not exist in my parser, that was sort of the point.

It already does, in fact, handle "le broda joi mi brode", and in the
right way:

psumti2$Star1$1: /dev/stdin:1,9: joi mi brode

pjoikEk$1: /dev/stdin:1,9: joi mi brode

psumti3$1: /dev/stdin:1,13: mi brode

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/  ***  I'm a *male* Robin.
"Many philosophical problems are caused by such things as the simple
inability to shut up." -- David Stove, liberally paraphrased.
http://www.lojban.org/  ***  loi pimlu na srana .i ti rocki morsi