From lojbab@lojban.org Fri Nov 16 15:42:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 16 Nov 2001 23:42:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 84823 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2001 23:41:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m5.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 16 Nov 2001 23:41:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-4.cais.net) (205.252.14.74) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Nov 2001 23:41:24 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (ppp2.net-A.cais.net [205.252.61.2]) by stmpy-4.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id fAGNfN445347 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:41:23 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011116183302.00cdfdd0@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 18:41:39 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: ca'a pu (was: Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu?) In-Reply-To: <20011116225514.A218@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com> References: <3BF274A8.2070903@reutershealth.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 10:55 PM 11/16/01 +0000, Richard Curnow wrote: >On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 07:33:06AM -0700, Jay Kominek wrote: >Obviously {mi pu ca'a broda} does work. So the key difference is that >'pu' cannot follow 'ca'a' within a single time construction. > >I've investigated why jbofi'e doesn't reduce ca'a to a standalone term >(inferring 'ku') when 'pu' is the lookahead token. Essentially, it's >because it thinks it's starting to see something like > > mi ca'a pu gi le nanmu gi le ninmu cu broda > >(whatever that might mean), i.e. it's expecting to see 'gi' after pu to >make everything work out OK. This expression parses OK on the official >v2.33 parser. (I don't actually have the official v3 parser running yet >- I've never got round to sorting the build out.) > >I need to away and think quite hard about this problem. The full extent >of the bug is not yet clear to me - I presume I'm missing one of the >pre-parser stages that the official parser has. ca'a pu should never be acceptable even before a gi. It has to have the ku (or have it inferred by YACCs error processing. simple tag + GI is a lexer_G construction, and the simple tag cannot include the ca'a. It should know before it leaves preparsing whether the PU is or is not part of a lexer_G. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org