This is because regular expression disregards which sequences of e can come one after the other.
That way, even though this works:
/(\w+\se\s\w+)/g
foo aaa e bbb bar baz ccc e ddd qux
This wouldn’t work:
/(\w+\se\s\w+)/g
foo aaa e bbb e ccc qux
Because the regular expression /(\w+\se\s\w+)/g does not determine the match two sequences in a row from each other. That’s because it requires before and afterward of e. In case you’ve already given match in an expression immediately prior to the next e, will have nothing "before" it, so that the match will be impossible for not meeting this condition.
One solution is to indicate that any term after the e can be repeated within a single match. An option would be like this:
/\w+(?:\se\s\w+)+/g
foo aaa e bbb bar baz ccc e ddd e eee qux
See on Regex101.
Although the above regular expression works for cases where words are formed by ASCII alphanumeric characters, accented letters (such as é, á, à etc) are not covered by \w.
So you can change the expression to:
/\p{L}+(?:\se\s\p{L}+)+/gu
foo aáà e bbb bar baz ccc e ddd e eéè qux
See on Regex101.
So that by using the flag u, can be used \p{L}, that captures any letter defined by the Unicode standard - which includes the aforementioned accented characters.
While already well supported, some environments may not implement regular expressions with flag unicode. In such cases, for alternatives to \p{L} with the flag u, consult the another answer.
Not related to the answer, but it is worth noting that the regular expression original of the question (/(\w+\se\s\w+)/g) could be replaced by /\w+\se\s\w+/g, since the capture group in this case does nothing.
If the phrase changes to
"olá eu e ela temos o numero é trezentos e vinte e quatro tudo bem?"will give problem.– Augusto Vasques
I’m upping the answers, but I think the problem is much bigger than regex is NLP.
– Augusto Vasques
Well placed Ugusto, I did a search now in nlp and there are some libraries in Ode that do several negotiations for what I understand right? I’ll dig a little deeper into the subject, thank you very much!!
– Jeferson