[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [engelang] Binary Trees by Tone

I imagine that the situations where someone needs a completely unambiguous syntax are situations where someone would be careful enough to justify the use of open-parenthesis and close-parenthesis particles instead.

I doubt a typical human been can sound natural saying very complex sentences, no matter how concise the ending particles are.


2012/8/20 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@hidden.email>
 



On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Mike S. <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
 
For example, starting with ((t1 t2)(t3 t4)):


        /\
       /  \
      /    \
     /\    /\
    t1 t2 t3 t4


        t3
       /  \
     t1    t4
      \
       t2  

o Voilà, we're done. 

If I start with (((t1 t2) t3) t4) instead:

        /\
       /  \
      /\   \
     /  \   \
    /\   \   \
   t1 t2 t3  t4

I seem to end up with the same raised tree you ended up with:

I first raise t1:

        /\
       /  \
      /\   \
    t1  \   \
     \   \   \
      t2 t3  t4

then t3 (since t1 already has a right branch):

        /\
       t3 \
      /    \
     t1     \
      \      \
      t2     t4


And t3 again:

        t3
       /  \
     t1    \
      \     \ 
       t2    \
                            \
                             t4

If two different trees end up having the same raised tree, then encoding the raised tree won't be enough to encode any tree.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





--
Até mais!

Leonardo