BPFK Section: Erasures
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 11:01:22PM -0500, Rob Speer wrote:
> > How do you define "the same selma'o" without requiring
> > memorization of a whole bunch of lists of cmavo? It's not "can be
> > interchanged grammatically in any context", because we know there
> > are distinct selma'o that are grammatically equivalent.
>
> Not if xorxes has his way. 
No two selma'o are interchangeable with the current grammar,
precisely because the SA rule makes sure they are not
interchangeable.
I would certainly like to reduce the number of selma'o,
and not only those that are identical but for the SA rule
(TAhE and ZAhO, UI and CAI, DAhO and FUhO, and I think
that's it). I would put UI, CAI, NAI, FUhE, DAhO, FUhO,
RAhO and GAhO all in the same selma'o, for example,
and the same for BAI, CAhA, CUhE, KI, ZI, PU, VA, ZEhA,
VEhA and VIhA (see
<http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Internal+grammar+of+tags>).
> It's worth noting that switching to a same-world rule would
> dramatically increase the parser's context sensitivity, and possibly
> slow it down quite a bit. This isn't an argument as such, just
> mentioning.
I don't think same-word would be a good rule either. I would
rather have something like: SA+selbri erases from last beginning
of bridi-tail, SA+term erases from last beginning of term,
SA+relative-clause erases from last beginning of relative-clause,
SA+(I/NIhO) erases from last beginning of new sentence, and that's
about it, just the major structures.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com