Wrote my first twenty definitions on Jbovlaste — looking to have them reviewed.

[xabju]

Hello, all,

I'm still a rank beginner at Lojban, but I noticed some lexical gaps and got to work filling them today. I've written twenty definitions on Jbovlaste so far, but they're generally far from perfect. I'm wondering if any of you could look them over and help me revise them. I will defer to the experts.

In particular, I'm concerned I haven't gotten the place structures right. At the superficial level, I haven't been sure when to use simple variables like "x1", "x2", etc., and when to use compound ones like "m2=z3", etc. (Actually, I don't quite have the vocabulary to say what the problems are. What do you call an "x1" thingy? A variable? A place abbreviation? A slot name?) The instructions on the site were not so clear to me. I'm also not sure I've gotten the underlying semantics and syntax right for a few.

Thanks in advance!

mi'e la xabju

[xabju]

After posting this, I wrote a bunch of low-effort cmevla entries. These I'm less concerned about; I'm looking for other pairs of eyes mainly on the first twenty definitions (from top).

[Pierre Abbat]

On Tuesday, 5 June 2018 22.10.04 EDT xabju wrote:
> Hello, all,
>
> I'm still a rank beginner at Lojban, but I noticed some lexical gaps and
> got to work filling them today. I've written twenty definitions

> <http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/personal/Xabju?extra=defs> on Jbovlaste so

> far, but they're generally far from perfect. I'm wondering if any of you
> could look them over and help me revise them. I will defer to the experts.
>
> In particular, I'm concerned I haven't gotten the place structures right.
> At the superficial level, I haven't been sure when to use simple variables
> like "x1", "x2", etc., and when to use compound ones like "m2=z3", etc.
> (Actually, I don't quite have the vocabulary to say what the problems are.
> What do you call an "x1" thingy? A variable? A place abbreviation? A slot
> name?) The instructions on the site were not so clear to me. I'm also not
> sure I've gotten the underlying semantics and syntax right for a few.

I wouldn't use "cunso" for what you've called "cunrafsi", as they weren't
assigned randomly.

For "mudga'a", the glosses "pole" and "staff" don't specify wood. They need
senses, as "pole" can also mean "jedji'o" (the poles of the Earth) and "staff"
has other meanings, but cylindrical poles and staffs can be metal. Flagpoles,
which are often metal, can be called staffs. Also, I wouldn't put "tree;
plant" as a place keyword, because someone looking for "tree; plant" most
likely wants "tricu". If a place keyword is likely to be the same for several
words, you probably want to omit it.

"UUTC" I would write "uudj". Several Slavic languages devoice final consonants,
but as soon as you add a case ending with a vowel, they're no longer final and
are voiced. Lojban already conflates "ż" and "ź"; there's no need to further
conflate them with "sz" and "ś" just because they're at the end of a word.

"snitc" needs explanation. Is snitch a disease, a game, or what?

Pierre
--
The Black Garden on the Mountain is not on the Black Mountain.

[xabju]

Hi Pierre,

Thanks for your feedback! snitc was a joke entry, which I somewhat regret posting (it was late, my judgment wasn't good). I was thinking of the much-hyped upcoming Death Grips album Year of the Snitch, but the word could also be used when you need to call your English-speaking interlocutor a snitch in a way they'll immediately understand.

I used cunso in cunrafsi because the note on sutysisku has the gloss "arbitrary", which is the sense I was going for. What would you suggest instead?

Those glosses for mudga'a were absentminded mistakes. Thank you for catching them. They now read as I think they should: "wooden cane", "wooden pole", "wooden staff", "wooden stick". I've changed the x2 keyword to "wood source; tree(s)". Is that alright?

Your point is taken on UUTC. My thinking was that it would be unfair to force speakers of final-obstruent-devoicing languages to distinguish final voiced consonants in pausa (as Lojban mandates), but I understand why many may prefer uudj. The bigger question, for me, is whether it's right to put monosyllabic cmevla in all caps. It looks very odd, but I presume that most speakers stress these words when they say them aloud. What do you think?

Also, what do you think of my most recent lujvo entries? Again, I'm not as worried about the cmevla, unnecessary as some of them may be.

[Pierre Abbat]

On Thursday, 7 June 2018 14.40.11 EDT xabju wrote:
> Hi Pierre,
>

> Thanks for your feedback! *snitc* was a joke entry, which I somewhat regret

> posting (it was late, my judgment wasn't good). I was thinking of the

> much-hyped upcoming Death Grips album *Year of the Snitch*, but the word

> could also be used when you need to call your English-speaking interlocutor
> a snitch in a way they'll immediately understand.

Or what about the Golden Snitch?

> I used *cunso* in *cunrafsi* because the note on sutysisku
> <https://la-lojban.github.io/sutysisku/en/#sisku/cunso> has the gloss

> "arbitrary", which is the sense I was going for. What would you suggest
> instead?

I'd say "naljvarafsi", but there are still some rules for short rafsi.

> Those glosses for *mudga'a* were absentminded mistakes. Thank you for

> catching them. They now read as I think they should: "wooden cane", "wooden
> pole", "wooden staff", "wooden stick". I've changed the x2 keyword to "wood
> source; tree(s)". Is that alright?

The glosses are good, but I still don't see why the word needs an x2 keyword.

> Your point is taken on *UUTC*. My thinking was that it would be unfair to

> force speakers of final-obstruent-devoicing languages to distinguish final
> voiced consonants in pausa (as Lojban mandates), but I understand why many

> may prefer *uudj*. The bigger question, for me, is whether it's right to

> put monosyllabic cmevla in all caps. It looks very odd, but I presume that
> most speakers stress these words when they say them aloud. What do you
> think?

I think it's unnecessary to mark stress on monosyllables. (I also prefer the
accent mark to capitalization, but that's another question.)

In Colombia I saw "la app". I agree that it's feminine, but I'm not sure
whether it's "el app". In Spanish there's a rule, which arose centuries ago
when the article was changing from "ela" to "la", that if the next word starts
with stressed /a/, the feminine article is "el", e.g. "el agua". "App", of
course, is a recent borrowing, but "haz", a variant of "faz", is another
monosyllabic feminine noun beginning with /a/. I'm pretty sure (but not
totally) that "haz" arose long after "ela agua" became "el agua". A word
ending in "p" or "z" (as opposed to one ending in "n" or "s") is, by default,
stressed on the last syllable, so "haz" and "app" are stressed but "ron" is
not, but that's an orthographic rule made up by the RAE. So I think the "el/la
app" question is up to the RAE.

Another question about stress in cmevla is what to do in a polysyllabic one
which has no stress. By default, stress is on the next-to-last syllable,
ignoring syllabic consonants and skipping syllables whose only vowel is "y".
But some languages have no stress, or have other things, such as tone.

> Also, what do you think of my most recent lujvo entries? Again, I'm not as
> worried about the cmevla, unnecessary as some of them may be.

They look much improved. I still think that it's unnecessary to put a keyword
for every place.

For "darkling beetle" I'm thinking "mancakcinki". The common and scientific
names ("tenebrae" means "darkness") refer to the beetles' habit of dwelling in
dark places.

I think "kalcycinki" should be "kalcycakcinki" if it refers just to dung
beetles. There are other insects that eat dung, such as some flies.

Can anyone explain why the definition of "cinki" says "insect/arthropod"? Maybe
it's because "lokra" hadn't been invented yet, maybe it's to allow for
Linnaeus's original Insecta which included all arthropods. Normally in lujvo,
"cinki" should be restricted to hexapods, "jukni" to chelicerates, and "lokra"
to crustaceans; as to centipedes and millipedes, vlanuncau. (I didn't invent
"lokra"; I just entered it.)

Pierre
--
gau do li'i co'e kei do