From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Dec 05 17:10:14 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 6 Dec 2002 01:10:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 84366 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 01:10:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2002 01:10:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 01:10:11 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18K70N-0004FG-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:10:11 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18K6zr-0004Es-00; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:09:39 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:09:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from lakemtao04.cox.net ([68.1.17.241]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18K6zm-0004Eg-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:09:34 -0800 Received: from nora.lojban.org ([68.100.206.153]) by lakemtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20021206010904.ZADS1248.lakemtao04.cox.net@nora.lojban.org> for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:09:04 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021205200740.00ac9740@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: noras@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 20:11:28 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: cmegadri valfendi preti In-Reply-To: <000901c29c41$ad45b830$c3edf8c1@tanj> References: <02120414202304.01986@neofelis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-archive-position: 3102 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: noras@lojban.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Nora LeChevalier From: Nora LeChevalier Reply-To: noras@lojban.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out At 10:34 AM 12/5/02 +0100, Lionel wrote: >Pierre Abbat: > > Another question: why is the cmegadri broken off from what precedes it, > > instead of just breaking between the cmene and the cmegadri and leaving > > the cmegadri to be found later? What about {MUstelaVIson} > > and {muSTElaVIson}? How > > should they be analyzed? > >Because when you make that break you *must* flag the cmegadri part as a >cmegadri (otherwise a pause before the cmene would have been necessary), >whereas a further parsing may change what you thought was a cmegadri >to, say, a brivla ending... which would then invalidate your previously >parsed cmene! (I hope I am clear enough :-) >So: {MUstelaVIson} = {MUste la Vison} and {muSTElaVIson} is >rejected because a brivla cannot end with a stressed syllable. >Note that, while I consider that result correct, I find the error label >quite unlogical: a forward parsing would give an error after parsing >{muSTEla}, saying that a pause is needed before cmene {Vision}, > which seems much more palatable: better error messages are another >advantage IMO of a change of the current backward algorithm >for a forward one. > >-- Lionel I used a backward algorithm because a forward algorithm is susceptible to garden-pathing. For example, 'miKLAmaleZARcifuleKARcegi'eBEVrileDAKlis' is a name, but you don't know it until the final letter. -- mi'e noras noras@lojban.org Nora LeChevalier