WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


PEG Morphology Algorithm

posts: 1912



> Jorge Llamb��)B�as scripsit:
>
> > In cmene and lujvo: iy, uy and yy are added.
>
> I assume you mean cmavo rather than lujvo.

Yes.

> "yy" should not be allowed;
> it has no defined pronunciation.

That's a concesion to usage. People tend to write yyyyyy
for long hesitations.

We can define that y+ is equivalent to y for all purposes.

> > It would be relatively easy to forbid vowel triples everywhere. We just
> > add "!(vowel-y vowel-y)" at the end of the vowel rules.
>
> I believe we should do so. This is a break with the past, but a modest one.

I tend to agree. valfendi does this for cmavo already, but not
for cmene and fuhivla.

> > I don't see any reason to make cmene different from cmavo as far
> > as vowels are concerned.
>
> The point is that iy and uy are reserved for a morphological mechanism.
> Can arbitrary fu'ivla lujvo be constructed using iy after an initial
> fu'ivla, iy before and after a medial fu'ivla, and iy before a final
> fu'ivla? That was the original design.

Yes, for all fuhivla that don't start with a vowel.

(For those that do start with a vowel, we would need to allow
iy+vowel which I don't think is acceptable.)

The design I had in mind was for iy to be used only after fuhivla
to form its rafsi, but I see that allowing it after normal rafsi
would have its advantages too. Another possibility would be to not
allow it after normal rafsi but allow it to give a rafsi to every
cmavo!

> As I said before, allowing iy and uy in cmene even when they are reserved
> otherwise is safe because cmene are defined backwards.

In PEG they are defined forwards, but it doesn't matter anyway.

If iy is allowed after normal rafsi, or to give rafsi to
every cmavo, then it should not be allowed in cmavo.
That's a good reason.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
Send holiday email and support a worthy cause. Do good.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com