Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE 2$i

[Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>]

> Date:         Wed, 13 Mar 1996 22:50:29 +0200
> From: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
> Subject:      Re: TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE 2$i

> --- in the rules for term_set_83 replace
>
>       GEK_807 terms_80 GIK_816 NUhU_gap_460
>          terms_80 NUhU_gap_460
>
>     with
>
>       GEK_807 terms_80 term_81 GIK_816
>          terms_80 term_81 NUhU_gap_460
>
> Now, a termset must have at least two terms.

  This has the weakness compared to the present grammar that single
  non-sumti terms cannot be connected. Allowing single terms here
  caused a conflict with rule sumti_D_94 : GEK sumti GIK sumti.
  The following modification will allow the connection of single
  terms:

term_81                 :  sumti_90
                        |  term_81_A
                        ;

term_81_A               :  modifier_82
                        |  term_set_83
                        |  NA_KU_810
                        ;

Add the following line to the rules for term_set_83:

        GEK_807 term_81_A GIK_816 term_81_A NUhU_gap_460

The NUhU isn't absolutely necessary -- only it must either be always
required or always omitted.

  co'o mi'e veion

---------------------------------
.i mi du la'o sy. Veijo Vilva sy.
---------------------------------