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

[lojban] Re: experimental cmavo in lojgloss.





On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 07:36, Daniel Brockman <daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> But in that case it won't be
>> of help for fixing something that is grammatically broken, like
>> SI/SA/SU are meant to do. For example {mi kjama le zarji lo'ai kjama
>> sa'ai klama le'ai} will parse as "{mi} followed by uninterpretable
>> gibberish", so it will never get to a higher level for interpretation.
>
> It will when you are talking to a human.

Right, but it would still be unparsable. The problem is that the text
before it is ungrammatical, and so has to be ignored by the parser to
get the whole thing to parse, which requires that the parser
understand which words the lo'ai is nulling out. It can't be treated
half-way and have things still parse.

The obvious way to implement {lo'ai .. sa'ai .. le'ai} in a parser is to just treat it as a self-contained construct that requires morphologically correct Lojban inside it, just like {lo'u .. le'u'}, and syntactically correct Lojban before it (just like everything else).  Anything more advanced than that is, well, more advanced.

Of course it would require extraordinary methods to get things like {kwama lo'ai kwama sa'ai klama le'ai} --- or why not {fsen.45ynl5tnerg98ehg4n su coi} --- to parse.  It's not practical and not cost-efficient.  The {kjama} example falls in this category because {kj} is morphologically invalid.

What _would_ be useful and cost-efficient would be to get things like {.i .ai mi cakla sa'ai ckakla le'ai} to parse.  The parser shouldn't try to actually replace anything at the parser level.  It should just parse the {le'ai} construct and report its syntax tree to the client.

A first approximation would be to just put {lo'ai} and {sa'ai} in LOhU and {le'ai} in LEhU.  The next step would be to give this construct its own, specifically appropriate, syntax.

--
Daniel Brockman
daniel@brockman.se