[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
----- Original Message ----- From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@hidden.email> > (The real answer is that we tried to make the grammar as unrestricted as > possible, while still being able to resolve the structure unambigously per > YACC. > > There is all kinds of nonsense possible in number strings too, so we should > expect some amount of nonsense to be grammatical in Lojban sumti structures. > > At one time I was one of those fighting to find interpretations for as many > possible strings, but Cowan convinced me that this was a waste of time.) One of these days we should write a grammar of that part of Lojban that is meaningful -- a grammar that people can/should actually learn. --And.