Re: "Self-Segregating Syntax"? (Unique Trees, Recoverable Uniquely From The String)

On 4/15/06, Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...> wrote:
> There has been much since Dec 2005, and also recently, about "self-
> segregating" or "auto-isolating" morphology on this list.  (This is a
> morphology in which each segment/phoneme in a word goes with a particular
> morpheme -- syllable boundaries, morpheme boundaries, and word boundaries
> are uniquely recoverable from the utterance.)
>
> I am interested in the analogous situation in re syntax.
In one of the December 2005 threads about self-segregating
morphology, there were a couple of posts about high
and low precedence binder morphemes within compound
words.  The same principle could probably be applied to
high and low precedence conjunctions, adpositions, and
so forth between words.
See my message of 12/21/2005,
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0512c&L=conlang&I=-3&P=15436

and Tom Chappell's reply:
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0512c&L=conlang&I=-3&P=16951

--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry