WikiDiscuss

Re: BPFK Section: Erasures

Instead of looking at the selmaho of the following word
and then erasing back until another member of that selmaho
is found, SA could look at the following major construct and
erase back until another start of such construct is found.

The main two constructs involved would be "term" and "bridi-tail",
since those would have to be the most common uses of SA:

mi klama le zarci sa le zdani
I go to the market, I mean, to the house.

(That one doesn't change.)

mi viska la djan sa le bruna be la djan
I saw John, I mean, John's brother.

mi viska le bruna be la djan sa tirna by
I saw John's brother, I mean, heard him.

(Whether pronouns will work like this is a separate issue.
The point here is that tirna replaces {viska}, not {bruna},
because it is a bridi-tail.)

The construct to be erased need not have been completed,
this will also work:

mi viska le sa la djan
I saw the, I mean, John.

The constructs that SA would detect are:

term
bridi-tail
sentence
relative-clause
links (be)
linkargs (bei)
joik-ek (sumti connective)
gihek (bridi-tail connective)

(and I suppose operands and operators within MEX)

I would have SA simply ignore free modifiers and indicators.

This would require some 10 rules for SA instead of the
current 120, and people would not need to learn what
word belongs in what selmaho. The substitution of a term with
a term, a selbri with a selbri, a relative clause with a relative
clause and so on is also intuitive enough that people won't
really have to think in terms of the grammatical construct
in order to apply the rule.

Opinions?

mu'o mi'e xorxes