From jjllambias@hotmail.com Fri Mar 02 17:19:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 01:19:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 51530 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 01:19:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 01:19:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.116) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 01:19:14 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 17:19:14 -0800 Received: from 200.41.247.37 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sat, 03 Mar 2001 01:19:13 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.37] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] bi'i syntax Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 01:19:13 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Mar 2001 01:19:14.0108 (UTC) FILETIME=[F57BCFC0:01C0A37F] From: "Jorge Llambias" la pier cusku di'e >I tried these utterances on jbofi'e: > >mi klama le zdani ku bi'i le ckule >(parses) >mi klama le zdani bi'i le ckule > >What's wrong with the second one? I just dropped "ku" which is elidable... {bi'i} is essentially like a JOI. After {le zdani bi'i} the parser expects another brivla, e.g. {le zdani bi'i ckule}, and it can't handle anything else. This has to do with the LALR1ness of the grammar. I don't think it could ever be ambiguous for a human listener, but {ku} is not elidable there. co'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.