[lojban] compound cmavo classification in cmavo.txt

[".alyn.post." <alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org>]

The following file:

  http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/cmavo.txt

Is a list of cmavo.  I believe it is the canonical list, please
correct me if that is a misunderstanding.

This file includes compound cmavo, like "le go'i", but only
includes a single selma'o class, even when the compound cmavo
consists of cmavo in more than one selma'o. 

I've loaded all of the entries in cmavo.txt into the parser and
categorized the results I get when comparing what the parser says
to what cmavo.txt says.  Most entries make sense, but some don't.

Here are the patterns from the parser -> cmavo.txt.  cmavo.txt has
only a single entry, whereas the parser is classifying individual
cmavo.  '?' is a free variable, and is equal on both sides of the
production.  That means that for single cmavo the production
'? -> ?' should (and does) hold: the parser is consistent with the
cmavo.txt file.

parser     -> cmavo.txt
? BU       -> BY   ; letteral conversion, an artifact of my parser.
FEhE ?     -> ?    ; with FEhE, cmavo.txt uses second selma'o.
FEhE PA ?  -> ?
I ?        -> ?    ; I prefix is ignored.
I NA ?     -> ?    ; and so is negation.
I ? NAI    -> ?
JAI VA     -> SE   ; Why?
JAI BAI    -> SE   ; Why?
JAI PU     -> SE   ; Why?
LAhE ?     -> ?    ; cmavo.txt uses the second selma'o here.
LE GOhA    -> KOhA ; Why?
LE SE GOhA -> KOhA ; Why?
MOhI ?     -> ?    ; cmavo.txt uses the second selma'o here.
NA ?       -> ?    ; ignore negation.
NAhE ?     -> ?    ; ignore negation.
PA+ ?      -> ?    ; ignore quantifier.
PU ZAhO    -> ZAhO ; "PU ZAhO" is ZAhO, "PU !ZAhO ?" is PU.
SE ?       -> ?    ; ignore conversion prefix
SE ? KOhA  -> ?    ; ignore conversion prefix
SE ? NAI   -> ?    ; ignore conversion prefix, negation.
? _ _      -> ?    ; everything else matches the first selma'o.
? _        -> ?    ; everything else matches the first selma'o.
?          -> ?    ; if there is only one cmavo, we're consistent.

I particularly question these productions:

JAI VA     -> SE
JAI BAI    -> SE
JAI PU     -> SE
LE GOhA    -> KOhA
LE SE GOhA -> KOhA

Because I don't think there is any grammatical way in that compound
cmavo become a differente, single cmavo, save for BU converting it
and it's prefix into BY.  I believe these conversions are
grammatically equivalent (I haven't confirmed them all), but that
doesn't change their selma'o class, does it? Is cmavo.txt in error
here?

I also wonder about the consequence of this pattern:

PU ZAhO    -> ZAhO

Because it is the only PU-prefixed class that behaves this way, the
other compound cmavo being in selma'o PU. 

I can provide the actual lines in cmavo.txt for these patterns,
please ask.  I think looking at the overall classification is a
better demonstration of the question, though some of these categories
have only a single entry in cmavo.txt, and any actual errors need
to be confirmed case-by-case.

-Alan

PS: The source code for which this e-mail is based on can be found
here:

http://bugs.call-cc.org/browser/release/4/jbogenturfahi/trunk/tests/cmavo.scm
-- 
.i ko djuno fi le do sevzi

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.