Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE X4: Forethought bridi and bridi-tail connection

[Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>]

la lojbab cusku di'e

> This one I am SURE won't YACC.  We tried - many times.  It requires
> eliminating the grammatical distinction between bridi and bridi-tail
> absolutely, not just in forethought connection.

But that is exactly what I am proposing. Why should there be a
grammatical distinction between bridi and bridi-tail, when there
is no semantic distinction? This is the sort of modification I had
in mind:


sentence = [term ...] bridi-tail | prenex sentence

bridi-tail = bridi-tail-1
        [gihek [stag] KE # bridi-tail /KEhE#/ tail-terms] ...

bridi-tail-1 = bridi-tail-2 [gihek # bridi-tail-2 tail-terms] ...

bridi-tail-2 = bridi-tail-3 [gihek [stag] BO # bridi-tail-2 tail-terms]

bridi-tail-3 = [CU #] selbri tail-terms | gek-sentence tail-terms

gek-sentence = gek sentence gik sentence



Instead of the current:


sentence<40> = bridi-tail | sentence-1

sentence-1<41> = term ... [CU #] bridi-tail | gek sentence-1 gik sentence |
        prenex sentence

bridi-tail<50> = bridi-tail-1
        [gihek [stag] KE # bridi-tail /KEhE#/ tail-terms] ...

bridi-tail-1<51> = bridi-tail-2 [gihek # bridi-tail-2 tail-terms] ...

bridi-tail-2<52> = bridi-tail-3 [gihek [stag] BO # bridi-tail-2 tail-terms]

bridi-tail-3<53> = selbri tail-terms | gek-bridi-tail

gek-bridi-tail<54> = gek bridi-tail gik bridi-tail-3 |
        tag KE gek-bridi-tail /KEhE#/ | NA # gek-bridi-tail



The only important difference is that {i cu broda} would be allowed
(I don't see why it isn't allowed now), but that can be changed back,
although in that case the rules would look more complicated.

Jorge