Hi László,
The COMPOUNDRULE feature of Hunspell 1.2.7 has already worked with long
affixes by parenthesized flags, so you can try to check some elisions with
it:
aff:
-----
ONLYINCOMPOUND xx
COMPOUNDRULE 1
COMPOUNDRULE (L')(No)
dic:
l'/L'xx
éléphant/No
I plan to extend COMPOUNDRULE feature with special morphological conditions,
too:
COMPOUNDRULE (L')(No NOT is:plural)
I am surprised. I thought the coumpounding system was conceived for
complex words, like 'mille-neuf-cent-quatre-vingt-quatre' (1984), not
for common prefixation/suffixation.
Is compounding a process quicker than prefixation/suffixation?
If so, why bother with morphological conditions? Here is the solution:
aff:
ONLYINCOMPOUND xx
COMPOUNDRULE 14
COMPOUNDRULE (Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (L')(Pl)
COMPOUNDRULE (D')(Pl)
COMPOUNDRULE (D')(Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qu)(Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qq)(Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qp)(Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (Ql)(Pl)(S.)
COMPOUNDRULE (L')(Sg)
COMPOUNDRULE (D')(Sg)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qu)(Sg)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qq)(Sg)
COMPOUNDRULE (Qp)(Sg)
COMPOUNDRULE (Ql)(Sg)
dic:
l'/L'xx
d'/D'xx
qu'/Quxx
quoiqu'/Qqxx
puisqu'/Qpxx
lorsqu'/Qlxx
s/S.
éléphant/Pl <---- word with -s for plural flexion
aurochs/Sg <---- no additionnal -s for plural
>> éléphant
>> éléphants
>> l'éléphant
>> d'éléphant
>> d'éléphants
>> qu'éléphants
>> quoiqu'éléphants
>> puisqu'éléphants
>> lorsqu'éléphants
>> aurochs
>> l'aurochs
>> d'aurochs
>> qu'aurochs
>> quoiqu'aurochs
>> puisqu'aurochs
>> lorsqu'aurochs
In this case, morphological conditions are not necessary.
That could be quite simple for simple nouns. I think I could also create
all flexions for feminine/masculine words with a huge amount of
compounding rules. But is that stuff the proper tool
But for verbs, that would be probably too much complex.
But this may be a task of the future grammar checker.
Imho, the apostrophe should be considered as a word separator for the
French language, because this is what it is. And that should the grammar
checker task to check if there is a mistake. This is already what
LanguageTool does, I think.
Elisions are the main issue for developping a French dictionary
(especially for verbs). I could divide the number of affix rules by two
if apostrophes were considered as a separator by OOo, and that would
also reduce the complexity of other rules (no more boring prefixation
depending of verb's grammatical category, person and tense).
And for the French language, hyphens should not be considered as a word
separator. But this is another matter. :)
Best regards,
Olivier
--
== N'écrivez pas à cette adresse. Réservée aux listes de discussion. ==
** Do not reply at this address. Mailing-list only. **
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
