From richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com Fri Mar 09 15:00:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 9 Mar 2001 23:00:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 40761 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2001 23:00:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Mar 2001 23:00:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO s1.uklinux.net) (212.1.130.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Mar 2001 23:00:58 -0000 Received: from rrbcurnow.freeuk.com (root@ppp-1-146.cvx5.telinco.net [212.1.152.146]) by s1.uklinux.net (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f29N0sB27245 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2001 23:00:54 GMT Envelope-To: Received: from richard by rrbcurnow.freeuk.com with local (Exim 2.02 #2) id 14bVoQ-00006x-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 9 Mar 2001 22:56:43 +0000 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 22:56:42 +0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] bi'i syntax Message-ID: <20010309225642.A412@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com> Reply-To: Richard Curnow Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <0103021945090G.22570@neofelis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i-nntp In-Reply-To: <0103021945090G.22570@neofelis>; from phma@oltronics.net on Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 07:42:23PM -0500 Sender: Richard Curnow X-eGroups-From: Richard Curnow From: Richard Curnow On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 07:42:23PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote: > 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 > -------------------- > SYNTAX ERROR IN TEXT > -------------------- > Misparsed token : > le [LE] (line 1, col 24) > Latest successfully parsed tokens : > bi'i [BIhI] (line 1, col 19) > MARKER : PRIVATE_START_JOIK > zdani [BRIVLA] (line 1, col 13) > le [LE] (line 1, col 10) > klama [BRIVLA] (line 1, col 4) > mi [KOhA3] (line 1, col 1) > -------------------- > What's wrong with the second one? I just dropped "ku" which is elidable... > The problem is that joiks are used as connectives for both selbri and for sumti. Contrast the logical connectives, where selbri use jeks and sumti use eks. The problem comes down to how the Lojban grammar is specified in terms of LALR1 parsing behaviour. In particular, whether or not an elidable terminator can be elided in a particular case comes down to whether its elision would change how the text is recognised by a yacc/bison style LALR parsing automaton. Because bi'i is a valid selbri connective, when it appears after le zdani the parser will think that it's a selbri connective and shift it. Now it finds 'le', which cannot be valid in this context => parse error. By this stage it is too late to back up and reduce 'le zdani' as a sumti so that bi'i can be applied as a sumti connective - yacc/bison generated parsers simply don't work that way. The jbofihe -sev option merely confirms the diagnosis : echo "mi klama le zdani ku bi'i le ckule" | test_jbofihe -sev Early shift hazards for words 'ku' (at line 1 col 19) <- ku X| <- The 'X' means that the next word (in this case bi'i) can be shifted in some context which occurs prior to the 'ku' being shifted, i.e. removing 'ku' will change the meaning (or even, as in this case, the validity) of the text. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard P. Curnow rpc@myself.com Weston-super-Mare United Kingdom http://go.to/richard.curnow/