The Dailies. July 2, 2020

The Dailies. July 2, 2020

Did you work on your language today? Create any new rules of grammar or syntax? New progress on a script? New words in your lexicon?

On the other hand, do any excavating or reading or enjoying stuff you’ve already created? Do you have any favorites to share?

How did you conlang today?


2 thoughts on “The Dailies. July 2, 2020

  1. Well, today I decided to try to replace the entire FSM part of WordGen/cpp, and that went almost nowhere because it turns out I have a migraine today, just without the pain. But the plan was to implement some of the things I said I planned to do on here in a comment from like a year ago that I partially forgot about. At least I’m still working on it and haven’t broken my stride with it just yet.

    My suspicion is that the reason the FSMs aren’t working is because of a difference in Unicode handling between Python and the C++ libraries I’m using, but I haven’t figured out the specifics. There’s nothing obviously wrong with them, they compile and run without errors, but they just don’t seem to do anything, suggesting that it’s an issue with the rule-matching. (If no rules match, the default rule is chosen, which, if not otherwise defined by the user, just writes the input as is directly to the output. Thus if rule-matching always fails, then the FSM would become a no-op, and a reason it might fail is Unicode, which is very complex and my code is probably not sufficient for it. Or it could be something else too.)

    I would quite like it if I had any users of WordGen besides myself, to provide design feedback, because I fear that it may only make sense to myself due to compounding idiosyncrasies from years of development.

    1. It turns out that that issue actually was simply that I forgot to return the data that I had transformed, and instead returned the input unmodified. And all the other bugs were similar, things like != instead of == or just things I’d forgotten to actually write at all. So, now, it can generate (questionably grammatical) English sentences!

      English Text
      If they’re its yellowest, and that didn’t do a bee, then I was oranger?
      If some bluer fish is blacker than some of those chickens, a yellower cup of some cup of one’s whiter bee of two cups of four of books of none of only being geese of a few of blue boxes of four of the pinker book’s own boxes of all of two of blacker books of a few of oxen’s deer was greyer than one, so pink things aren’t some of four of a few black fish’s pinkest, then only of two of oxen of the goose of four poking cups sneezed not.
      See those.
      You poke these.
      Be a fish!
      If they sneeze, then xe isn’t browner than this.
      I was her.
      One’s tannest cups were pinker than my books.
      Xe’s this purplest fish’s greenest!
      If it didn’t do, then I sneeze?
      Buy this.
      A whiter ox is yellower, a chicken was blacker than one’s, those were white, so these were black.
      You weren’t blacker than those.
      You be him.
      I’m browner?
      Be ours?
      This’s green, but I’m not greyer than four of those deer!
      The thing wasn’t whiter, and I did that!
      This did you.
      Chickens were greyer than theirs, so that didn’t do the seeing deer.
      You be hers.
      Bees’ grey boxes were the greyest, so I’m orange.
      If xe was green, you sneezed, things were, and four books aren’t his tannest, then these weren’t yellower?
      These were redder so the done cup is.
      I was pinker than that, for a few of a few of oxen aren’t her bluest.
      That doesn’t do, but I wasn’t black.
      Xe isn’t the whitest, and these poke those!
      If that does, then those weren’t blacker.
      If that was green, then I’m not its?
      Poked deer were tanner, four of three deer of the deer of this bee’s cups were greener than us, she was purpler than her, so they were purple.
      He isn’t her sneezing bees of bees of none of yellower fish of some of sneezing cups of the books of four of all of being chickens of poking oxen of our pink thing’s thing’s blackest, and one of these poking chickens was greener!
      Some box sneezed, for it sneezed.
      You be one’s cups.

      And so on. Before I started working on it yesterday, it would instead produce:

      V#1030 NP3siO.
      N#06p ~V#2015, but~ NPDddp V#2013.
      NP1sS ~~~~V#012 A#03> and NP2pS ~V#025 NPDddp.
      all of all of A#08- N#04pG A#05] N#09s V#011 NPDdpp.
      only of N#0Ap V#011 A#04> than NP3soD, and N#03p V#1025 NPDddp!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.