Prefixes and infixes

<mlforcada> I haven't thought much about it but I think the solution would be
<mlforcada> to see lexical forms as sets and not as sequences
<spectie> sergio said something about 'cartesian product'
<spectie> would this require changing the 'translation as a stream' thing ?
<mlforcada> so that pl.n.kitabu or pl.kitabu.n would be the same (swahili)
<mlforcada> in fact vitabu would naturally be pl.kitabu.n
<mlforcada> I think we should only change transfer
<mlforcada> something that either normalizes it or deals it in whatever order
<mlforcada> so that one could deal with pl.n.kitabu
<mlforcada> in fact
<mlforcada> in basque
<mlforcada> it would be very nice to have this for verbs:
<mlforcada> dakarzu: you bring it ; nakarzu : you bring me
<spectie> yep
<mlforcada> the morpheme for object/absolutive comes first
<mlforcada> so there are two possible ways
<mlforcada> (1) normalization of some kind, perhaps specified with some rules
<mlforcada> (2) treating LFs as sets
<mlforcada> and a middle way
<mlforcada> (1.5) detecting lexical forms in the sequence they are generated by the tagger
<mlforcada> however
<spectie> i think sets is probably cleaner ... although is there any information lost in the loss of ordering ?
<mlforcada> I think tagger rules should also be changed
<mlforcada> and we could have moyogo discuss lingala morphology which is also prefix, word classes, etc. as swahiki is
<mlforcada> I like it that verbs come marked with the classs of their object
<mlforcada> sw: nilikisoma: I read it where -ki- is it for a ki- class noun as kitabu
<spectie> is this inflectional or derivational ?
<mlforcada> ni-li-ki-soma : I-past-[ki object] soma
<mlforcada> I think it is inflection