Re: [lojban] groupyness in definitions

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Friday 29 July 2011 10:02:06 Luke Bergen wrote:
> Which, I've discovered that that's something else that I haven't gotten
> used to.  For some reason my brain thinks that {lo broda jo'u lo brode}
> should be completely legal and understandable.  For some reason {lo broda
> jo'u brode} looks strange to me.  Like, how would I say {la bab jo'u la mat
> cu broda} if {jo'u} doesn't take a sumti to the left, a sumti to the right,
> and then join them as a non-logical connective?

The LALR1 grammar cannot handle both cases; if you say "lo broda jo'u" to the 
YACC, it considers "jo'u" to join "broda" with another selbri, and when the 
next word is "lo", it chokes. To solve this, you have to say "ku" to 
terminate "lo broda" when joining it with "lo brode". The PEG handles it both 
ways.

Pierre
-- 
lo ponse be lo mruli po'o cu ga'ezga roda lo ka dinko

-- 
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.