Re: "Self-Segregating Syntax"?

Hallo!

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:19:21 -0400, Eldin Raigmore wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:03:19 +0200, Jörg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> [snip]
> >My experimental language X-1 not only has self-segregating morphology;
> >the arity (number of arguments) of a predicate word is indicated by its
> >length, it is always length minus 2.
> >[snip]
> >See:
> >http://wiki.frath.net/X-1
> >[snip]
>
> Thanks.
>
> I think the key new idea might be "the variable-based syntax", the
> inspiration for which you credit to veritosproject.
Actually, I got the idea as much from PROLOG as I did from veritosproject,
but it was the latter who reminded me at this option.

> It looks like there are the following three main ways to delimit the
> phrases or other word-groups (some systems use more than one at the same
> time);
>
> 1. Mark the beginning of every such group -- the group will then end just
> before the next beginning-of-a-group at the same or a higher level.
>
> 2. Mark the end of every such group -- the group will then begin just after
> the last previous end-of-a-group at the same or a higher level.
>
> 3. Encode the length of the group at one (or both) of its margins:  Either
> 3a At the beginning of every group; or,
> 3b At the end of every group;
> or both.
>
> Has anyone come up with any other ideas?  Or run into ideas someone else
> has come up with?
What I am doing in X-1 is that the number of arguments of a predicate word
is indicated by the length of the word.  And as I strictly use prefix syntax,
brackets are unnecessary.  What I have is the "scope delimiter" _j_, which
indicates that variables in following clauses are not coreferent with
variables of the same name in preceding clauses.

> Has anyone gotten any further than X-1 on any such scheme?  Or does anyone
> know of any natlang or successful conlang (possibly someone else's) which
> is more complete in this regard?
X-1 needs some further work on this.  There will be a set of junctors,
quantors and other logical operators.  I also don't know yet how to handle
proper names and other constants.

> Thanks, Joerg.
>
> (BTW: I admit I don't like X-1 much, but I think the orthography is my main
> reason for not liking it; perhaps also the phonology.  In other words I
> think I might like what you'd have gotten if you hadn't tried to make it a
> briefscript.)
True.  The phonology and the orthography aren't very beautiful :)  They
are mostly based on Ray Brown's suggestions (with the self-segregation
scheme used being developed by Jeff Prothero long time ago), and I thought
they were ingenious enough to put them to some use in an engelang.

X-1 is also not my favourite conlang, and only a little side project.
My main project remains the (naturalistic) Albic family.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf