Magic Words
> xorxes' proposal introduces *two* rules: left-to-right ordering,
> *and* consumption of clauses rather than words.
They are independent. You could do without the second one, all
you would have is more strings resulting in error. In other
words, the second rule is there only to handle what would
otherwise be error cases (failure to find a suitable word).
The only cmavo affected by this are {bu}, {zei} and {si}.
> One way to look at xorxes' SI is "SI consumes words, or clauses
> formed by other magic words".
Right.
> The other way (and, in fact, the much more likely way for someone
> who hasn't internalized formalized grammars to see it) is "SI
> consumes words, or zo+word, or zoi+delim+stuff+delim, or word+bu,
> or, or, or, or...".
>
> This was John's point; left-to-right ordering has nothing to do with
> it.
It has something to do with it. There would be no problem with
allowing SI to eat just the last word of the magic word clause,
but then, by left-to-right ordering the magic word is left
wanting a word, so a second SI will be gobbled by the magic
word. At this point is where you have to start to give
right-to-left precedence if you don't want this to happen.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com