bugs in jbovlaste

[ianek]

coi rodo

Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't good (usually misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not carved in stone! How come people keep complaining and errors are still there? I have some hypotheses:

a) people are lazy

b) people tend to avoid responsibility for making changes, because jbovlaste is so official

c) jbovlaste interface is very unpleasant and people avoid any contact with it

d) ????

Ad a. People somehow have power for complaining, they could use it for making world better as well?

Ad b. Maybe we should make an unofficial development clone of jbovlaste?

Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the hardest part...

Ad d. ????

mu'o mi'e ianek

[gleki]

Jbovlaste is by far the best dictionary engine I've seen in my life. Better than Wiktionary (looks more as a database, not a note-taking software), better than OmegaWiki (more fields for glosswords etc.)

[Robin Lee Powell]

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> coi rodo
> Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't good (usually
> misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not carved in stone! How come people
> keep complaining and errors are still there? I have some hypotheses:
>
> a) people are lazy

It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language framework
that no-one around here really likes, the original author is gone,
and I don't have the time. I've asked for help with it several
times, and been totally ignored.

> Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the hardest
> part...

I've also requested this many times. I gather Dag has done some
work here, but nothing worth showing off.

-Robin

--
http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

[ianek]

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> coi rodo
> Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't good (usually
> misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not carved in stone! How come people
> keep complaining and errors are still there? I have some hypotheses:
>
> a) people are lazy

It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language framework
that no-one around here really likes, the original author is gone,
and I don't have the time.  I've asked for help with it several
times, and been totally ignored.

I was talking about seperate things: the jbovlaste data and the jbovlaste interface. People complain about the data, especially misleading keywords/glosses. And AFAIK glosses are not baselined and can be changed at any time, unlike gismu definitions. And yet they stay the same.

 

> Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the hardest
> part...

I've also requested this many times.  I gather Dag has done some
work here, but nothing worth showing off.

To complete such a project you need at least two people: one who has the resources to do it (skill, time, will) and another, who knows what they want from this project and can demand from the former (which includes setting deadlines) and preferably has some power over them (eg. by paying them for work).

It's not easy to get such two people, but it's even harder (pe'i) to get a bigger project done without them.

I have some personal project (not Lojban-related) and as a single person I severely lack the second (the demanding), and I'm focusing on projects in which I have someone demanding.

Well I hope my poor English didn't obscure my thoughts too much here.

mu'o mi'e ianek

 

[Robin Lee Powell]

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:24:06AM -0700, ianek wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> > > coi rodo Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't
> > > good (usually misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not
> > > carved in stone! How come people keep complaining and errors
> > > are still there? I have some hypotheses:
> > >
> > > a) people are lazy
> >
> > It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language
> > framework that no-one around here really likes, the original
> > author is gone, and I don't have the time. I've asked for help
> > with it several times, and been totally ignored.
> >
>
> I was talking about seperate things: the jbovlaste data and the
> jbovlaste interface. People complain about the data, especially
> misleading keywords/glosses. And AFAIK glosses are not baselined
> and can be changed at any time, unlike gismu definitions. And yet
> they stay the same.

Gloss words for *gismu* are absolutely official, don't touch them.
Make notes at
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gismu+Issues , and if you
want me to get to them faster, help with CLLv1.1.

For everything else, if you think it needs fixing, change it.
Anything can be edited by anyone with an account.

> > > Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the
> > > hardest part...
> >
> > I've also requested this many times. I gather Dag has done some
> > work here, but nothing worth showing off.
> >
>
> To complete such a project you need at least two people: one who
> has the resources to do it (skill, time, will) and another, who
> knows what they want from this project and can demand from the
> former (which includes setting deadlines) and preferably has some
> power over them (eg. by paying them for work). It's not easy to
> get such two people, but it's even harder (pe'i) to get a bigger
> project done without them.

I'm perfectly capable of being the demander, if I had any evidence
that there was anyone around here who could be the do-er; everyone
who has ever offered to help with anything around here has stopped
helping within, at the very longest, about a month[1].

We have money, but we don't have the kind of money to pay someone to
complete a large-scale programming project at reasonable rates.

-Robin

[1]: There actually is one exception, but he had little choice as
his mother insisted that he work, volunteer, or leave her house;
IIRC he lasted for like 2 months, maybe 3, before suddenly stopping
work for no apparent reason; I have no idea what he told his mom.

[ianek]

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:20:18 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:24:06AM -0700, ianek wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> > > coi rodo Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't
> > > good (usually misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not
> > > carved in stone! How come people keep complaining and errors
> > > are still there? I have some hypotheses:
> > >
> > > a) people are lazy
> >
> > It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language
> > framework that no-one around here really likes, the original
> > author is gone, and I don't have the time.  I've asked for help
> > with it several times, and been totally ignored.
> >
>
> I was talking about seperate things: the jbovlaste data and the
> jbovlaste interface. People complain about the data, especially
> misleading keywords/glosses. And AFAIK glosses are not baselined
> and can be changed at any time, unlike gismu definitions. And yet
> they stay the same.

Gloss words for *gismu* are absolutely official, don't touch them.
Make notes at
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gismu+Issues , and if you
want me to get to them faster, help with CLLv1.1.  

Fine, I've just added aionys' complaints about familial gismu, and also xorxes' proposed definition of xruti. If anynone knows about other proposed changes, please check whether they're there and if not, add them.

 

For everything else, if you think it needs fixing, change it.
Anything can be edited by anyone with an account.

 

> > > Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the
> > > hardest part...
> >
> > I've also requested this many times.  I gather Dag has done some
> > work here, but nothing worth showing off.
> >
>
> To complete such a project you need at least two people: one who
> has the resources to do it (skill, time, will) and another, who
> knows what they want from this project and can demand from the
> former (which includes setting deadlines) and preferably has some
> power over them (eg. by paying them for work). It's not easy to
> get such two people, but it's even harder (pe'i) to get a bigger
> project done without them.

I'm perfectly capable of being the demander, if I had any evidence
that there was anyone around here who could be the do-er; everyone
who has ever offered to help with anything around here has stopped
helping within, at the very longest, about a month[1].

By saying "perfectly capable of being the demander" you (pe'i) don't mean that you have some power over potential doers, which is pe'i the source of problems. But it's really hard to gain power without lots of money, so I'm afraid I can't help here.

[Robin Lee Powell]

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:37:48AM -0700, ianek wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:20:18 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:24:06AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
> > > > > Ad c. Maybe we should make jbovlaste 2.0? I think it's the
> > > > > hardest part...
> > > >
> > > > I've also requested this many times. I gather Dag has done
> > > > some work here, but nothing worth showing off.
> > > >
> > >
> > > To complete such a project you need at least two people: one
> > > who has the resources to do it (skill, time, will) and
> > > another, who knows what they want from this project and can
> > > demand from the former (which includes setting deadlines) and
> > > preferably has some power over them (eg. by paying them for
> > > work). It's not easy to get such two people, but it's even
> > > harder (pe'i) to get a bigger project done without them.
> >
> > I'm perfectly capable of being the demander, if I had any
> > evidence that there was anyone around here who could be the
> > do-er; everyone who has ever offered to help with anything
> > around here has stopped helping within, at the very longest,
> > about a month[1].
> >
>
> By saying "perfectly capable of being the demander" you (pe'i)
> don't mean that you have some power over potential doers, which is
> pe'i the source of problems. But it's really hard to gain power
> without lots of money, so I'm afraid I can't help here.

Right, I meant capable of managing, not capable of providing
external motivation for people to be managed.

In a community this large, I would expect to *occassionally* call
for volunteers and actually get some significant help, but that
hasn't been the case, really, ever. It's kind of disturbing,
honestly. I wonder what is wrong.

-Robin

[MorphemeAddict]

I can't answer that question, but the whole issue of volunteers (or lack thereof) with Lojban makes an interesting case study. 

stevo

 

-Robin

--
http://singinst.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

[gleki]

On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:37:48 PM UTC+4, ianek wrote:

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:20:18 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:

On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:24:06AM -0700, ianek wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> > > coi rodo Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't
> > > good (usually misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not
> > > carved in stone! How come people keep complaining and errors
> > > are still there? I have some hypotheses:
> > >
> > > a) people are lazy
> >
> > It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language
> > framework that no-one around here really likes, the original
> > author is gone, and I don't have the time.  I've asked for help
> > with it several times, and been totally ignored.
> >
>
> I was talking about seperate things: the jbovlaste data and the
> jbovlaste interface. People complain about the data, especially
> misleading keywords/glosses. And AFAIK glosses are not baselined
> and can be changed at any time, unlike gismu definitions. And yet
> they stay the same.

Gloss words for *gismu* are absolutely official, don't touch them.
Make notes at
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gismu+Issues , and if you
want me to get to them faster, help with CLLv1.1.  

Fine, I've just added aionys' complaints about familial gismu, and also xorxes' proposed definition of xruti. If anynone knows about other proposed changes, please check whether they're there and if not, add them.

What's that with {xruti}? It's agentive, don't touch it!

Let's create another experimental gismu with the definition {x1 (agent) returns to origin/earlier state x3 from x4} or possibly with another order of sumti.

But {xruti} must retain the meaning.
OTHERWISE WE'LL LOSE COMPATIBILITY WITH OLDER TEXTS.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:21 AM, gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:37:48 PM UTC+4, ianek wrote:

Fine, I've just added aionys' complaints about familial gismu, and also xorxes' proposed definition of xruti. If anynone knows about other proposed changes, please check whether they're there and if not, add them.

What's that with {xruti}? It's agentive, don't touch it!

Let's create another experimental gismu with the definition {x1 (agent) returns to origin/earlier state x3 from x4} or possibly with another order of sumti.

But {xruti} must retain the meaning.
OTHERWISE WE'LL LOSE COMPATIBILITY WITH OLDER TEXTS.

First, this is not the place for this. If you'll notice the topic of this thread is "bugs in jbovlaste".

Second, you are over-reacting. Also, it is my personal opinion that, especially in the case of xruti, breaking older text is worth not having a broken place structure.

Third, that page is about issues, as in things we have found that need to be reviewed.

Fourth, you are taking the creation a new gismu entirely too lightly. Of all the possible changes to our language, a new gismu is the absolute /least/ likely to happen. In fact, the /only/ way a new gismu would be considered that I know of is in the case that we determine that some portion of the semantic space can not be represented by any combination of currently existant valsi, i.e. gismu, tanru, or lujvo, with za'uno cmavo intermigled, or alternately, is a concept of such widespread use as to merit it. For example, had Lojban been invented during the colonization of the Americas, it would obviously not have included "skami", as the very concept basically didn't exist at the time, but it would have since been added, considering both that it covers previously semantic space and is an extremely important part of modern existence.

In short, we do /not/ make new gismu unless it is /absolutely/ necessary.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

[ianek]

Sounds like PHP philosophy ;)
"Yes, this part of the language is broken, but we'll never fix it
because it breaks compatibility"

On 11 Maj, 12:21, gleki <gleki.is.my.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:37:48 PM UTC+4, ianek wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:20:18 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 11:24:06AM -0700, ianek wrote:
>
> >> > On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:01:27 PM UTC+2, Robin Powell wrote:
>
> >> > > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:33:34AM -0700, ianek wrote:
> >> > > > coi rodo Quite often I hear that something in jbovlaste isn't
> >> > > > good (usually misleading keywords). But jbovlaste is not
> >> > > > carved in stone! How come people keep complaining and errors
> >> > > > are still there? I have some hypotheses:
>
> >> > > > a) people are lazy
>
> >> > > It's more-or-less that; jbovlaste is written in a language
> >> > > framework that no-one around here really likes, the original
> >> > > author is gone, and I don't have the time.  I've asked for help
> >> > > with it several times, and been totally ignored.
>
> >> > I was talking about seperate things: the jbovlaste data and the
> >> > jbovlaste interface. People complain about the data, especially
> >> > misleading keywords/glosses. And AFAIK glosses are not baselined
> >> > and can be changed at any time, unlike gismu definitions. And yet
> >> > they stay the same.
>
> >> Gloss words for *gismu* are absolutely official, don't touch them.
> >> Make notes at

> >>http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gismu+Issues, and if you

> >> want me to get to them faster, help with CLLv1.1.
>
> > Fine, I've just added aionys' complaints about familial gismu, and also
> > xorxes' proposed definition of xruti. If anynone knows about other proposed
> > changes, please check whether they're there and if not, add them.
>
> What's that with {xruti}? It's agentive, don't touch it!
> Let's create another experimental gismu with the definition {x1 (agent)
> returns to origin/earlier state x3 from x4} or possibly with another order
> of sumti.
> But {xruti} must retain the meaning.

> *OTHERWISE WE'LL LOSE COMPATIBILITY WITH OLDER TEXTS.*

[Robin Lee Powell]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 06:54:45AM -0600, Jonathan Jones wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:21 AM, gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:37:48 PM UTC+4, ianek wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Fine, I've just added aionys' complaints about familial gismu, and also
> >> xorxes' proposed definition of xruti. If anynone knows about other proposed
> >> changes, please check whether they're there and if not, add them.
> >>
> >
> > What's that with {xruti}? It's agentive, don't touch it!
> > Let's create another experimental gismu with the definition {x1 (agent)
> > returns to origin/earlier state x3 from x4} or possibly with another order
> > of sumti.
> > But {xruti} must retain the meaning.

> > *OTHERWISE WE'LL LOSE COMPATIBILITY WITH OLDER TEXTS.*
> >
>
[snip]

>
> Second, you are over-reacting. Also, it is my personal opinion that,
> especially in the case of xruti, breaking older text is worth not having a
> broken place structure.
>

[snip]

>
> In short, we do /not/ make new gismu unless it is /absolutely/ necessary.

FWIW, as the apparent overlord these days, I disagree, *strongly*,
with both of those points. gismu should not be changed unless it
can be shown that particular places have been very rarely used
correctly, and I think making a bunch more gismu is a great idea.

When CLLv1.1 is done, maybe I'll have time to finish my essay on the
latter issue, and word creation in general.

-Robin

[gleki]

>>Sounds like PHP philosophy ;)
>>"Yes, this part of the language is broken, but we'll never fix it
>>because it breaks compatibility"

Exactly but we can add a new gismu and ignore the older one.
e.g.
{retro} - x1 returns to x2 from x3 (don't take the gismu "retro" too seriously, it's ad hoc word just for this case)

and {xruti} then will be just a synonym for {retrygau}.

[gleki]

>>FWIW, as the apparent overlord these days, I disagree, *strongly*,
>>with both of those points. gismu should not be changed unless it
>>can be shown that particular places have been very rarely used
>>correctly, and I think making a bunch more gismu is a great idea.

And I have to add that Next Lojban must not conflict with the existing one so that
in year 2112 texts written in 2012 will still be apprehensible.

[Robin Lee Powell]

You mean "comprehensible".

Generally speaing, yes, although I expect I *will* be changing some
things, but only with a clear, and fairly long, deprecation process,
and probably only things that have seen little or no actual use.

[Jonathan Jones]

Regarding the first point, I disagree that the /only/ time to change gismu is when people don't use it right. For example, the issue with irregular place structures. No one has incorrectly used the places of these words- unless you count using a place that doesn't exist because you think it does, and I don't- but I am of the opinion that these gismu should still be changed, especially in the cases where the change would not break current texts, as in the case with the familial gismu.

Regarding the second, I was more referring to current policy than any future practices. I have little opinion on the matter myself, save that I would prefer as little overlap as possible between new and existing gismu. There are places where we are sorely lacking, I'm sure, but I don't think we need to create new gismu that are really just synonyms of existing ones.

[gleki]

>>Regarding the second, I was more referring to current policy than any future practices. I have >>little opinion on the matter myself, save that I would prefer as little overlap as possible >>between new and existing gismu. There are places where we are sorely lacking, I'm sure, but I >>don't think we need to create new gismu that are really just synonyms of existing ones.

Don't have to say anything against.
Just a note that there are already numerous synonyms in the gismu list.
I could count only 340 gismu absolutely needed (+cultural gismu if we don't ignore them).

[Jonathan Jones]

I have a hard time believing that. I would need you to show me an example of this, as there are nearly 1400 gismu currently.

[gleki]

>>I have a hard time believing that. I would need you to show me an example of this, as there are nearly 1400 gismu currently.

A hard work to do. You probably will want to see the list of definitions of the rest of the gismu as combinations of the selected 340. And I don't have this currently. As for the list without definitions it'll be stabilised in several weeks.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 5:22 AM, gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>I have a hard time believing that. I would need you to show me an example of this, as there are nearly 1400 gismu currently.

A hard work to do. You probably will want to see the list of definitions of the rest of the gismu as combinations of the selected 340. And I don't have this currently. As for the list without definitions it'll be stabilised in several weeks.

I didn't say the whole list. I said an example.

[Jacob Errington]

It seems to me like some of the gismu are somewhat redundant to other gismu, or exist solely for the sake of simplifying lujvo.

My favourite example is {binxo}

All of the following are equivalent:

i mi binxo lo cusku

i mi co'a ckaji lo ka ce'u cusku

i mi co'a cusku

the transformations are possible by virtue of:

i da zo'u da binxo lo broda ijo da co'a ckaji lo ka ce'u broda

i da zo'u da co'a ckaji lo ka ce'u broda ijo da co'a broda

This makes binxo and ckaji useless, when not using KOhA in the x2.

Some others are facki, cilre, etc. which can be all reduced into djuno, or djuno + zukte.

(Actually, a lot of gismu are GISMU + zukte)

i da de di zo'u da facki de di ijo da co'a djuno de di

(not to mention: i da de di zo'u ca'a lo du'u da facki de di kei di ckaji de; which leads me to believe that facki2, djuno2, cilre2, etc. are ka1, not du'u1)

i daxipa daxire daxici daxivo daximu zo'u daxipa cilre daxire daxici daxivo deximu ijo da zukte daximu lo nu daxipa co'a djuno daxire daxici ra'i daxivo

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[Craig Daniel]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems to me like some of the gismu are somewhat redundant to other gismu,
> or exist solely for the sake of simplifying lujvo.

The gismu are not semantic primitives, nor were they meant to be. You
can speak a lot more succinctly with more of them; in fact, given the
morphological constraints and the desire to keep the vocabulary
(including common lujvo, used more often given the limits on gismu
colliding with one another) from being so huge nobody can plausibly
remember it all, the set we have now may be nearly [i]maximal[/i].

[Jonathan Jones]

Except for arguably cilre/facki, none of those are synonyms.

Insofar as Lojban is concerned, what I consider to be a synonym are those which differ only in place structure, where all that is required for them to have the same place structure- and the thereby the exact same meaning- are the use of one or more of FA, SE, zi'o, and BAI.

[Jacob Errington]

> Except for arguably cilre/facki, none of those are synonyms.

I never said they were *synonymous*, I said that they could be reduced
into one or an other. If one *does* use the more degenerate form, then
there're additional implications to be handled, such as tense,
usually.
Also, I'd say that the difference between "learning" and "finding out"
is that one requires volition.
I don't see things like [i mi cilre lo du'u lo mamtymamta cu co'a
morsi], I see things like [i mi facki lo du'u...].
Some synonyms:
mrobi'o and co'amro
tolyli'a and klamu'o
ckaji and tolcau
claxu and tolkai
binxo and co'arkai
cliva and klama
lasna and jongau

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Except for arguably cilre/facki, none of those are synonyms.

I never said they were *synonymous*, I said that they could be reduced
into one or an other. If one *does* use the more degenerate form, then
there're additional implications to be handled, such as tense,
usually.
Also, I'd say that the difference between "learning" and "finding out"
is that one requires volition.
I don't see things like [i mi cilre lo du'u lo mamtymamta cu co'a
morsi], I see things like [i mi facki lo du'u...].
Some synonyms:
mrobi'o and co'amro
tolyli'a and klamu'o
ckaji and tolcau
claxu and tolkai
binxo and co'arkai
cliva and klama
lasna and jongau

Most of those aren't gismu, so they don't count, leaving us with only cliva/klama.Don't respond to something if you're addressing it.

[MorphemeAddict]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Except for arguably cilre/facki, none of those are synonyms.

I never said they were *synonymous*, I said that they could be reduced
into one or an other. If one *does* use the more degenerate form, then
there're additional implications to be handled, such as tense,
usually.
Also, I'd say that the difference between "learning" and "finding out"
is that one requires volition.
I don't see things like [i mi cilre lo du'u lo mamtymamta cu co'a
morsi], I see things like [i mi facki lo du'u...].
Some synonyms:
mrobi'o and co'amro
tolyli'a and klamu'o
ckaji and tolcau
claxu and tolkai
binxo and co'arkai
cliva and klama
lasna and jongau

Most of those aren't gismu, so they don't count, leaving us with only cliva/klama.Don't respond to something if you're addressing it.

Is this supposed to be ".. if you're NOT addressing it"?

stevo 

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:01 PM, MorphemeAddict <lyt...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Except for arguably cilre/facki, none of those are synonyms.

I never said they were *synonymous*, I said that they could be reduced
into one or an other. If one *does* use the more degenerate form, then
there're additional implications to be handled, such as tense,
usually.
Also, I'd say that the difference between "learning" and "finding out"
is that one requires volition.
I don't see things like [i mi cilre lo du'u lo mamtymamta cu co'a
morsi], I see things like [i mi facki lo du'u...].
Some synonyms:
mrobi'o and co'amro
tolyli'a and klamu'o
ckaji and tolcau
claxu and tolkai
binxo and co'arkai
cliva and klama
lasna and jongau

Most of those aren't gismu, so they don't count, leaving us with only cliva/klama.Don't respond to something if you're addressing it.

Is this supposed to be ".. if you're NOT addressing it"?

stevo 

Yes.

[Jacob Errington]

I'm afraid no one is really understanding what I'm trying to get across.
With my list, I'm simply saying that a lot of gismu can be "removed"
by virtue of the fact that they're simply an agentive version, a
volitional version, or an implicitly tensed version of another gismu.
A few can be reduced into djuno, and some can almost be eliminated
(ckaji), where as for agentives, lasna is just jorne+BAI, in
particular {gau}. Isn't that what you said was your definition of
synonymous, eyeonous?

[gleki]

>>I'm afraid no one is really understanding what I'm trying to get across.
With my list, I'm simply saying that a lot of gismu can be "removed"
by virtue of the fact that they're simply an agentive version, a
volitional version, or an implicitly tensed version of another gismu.
A few can be reduced into djuno, and some can almost be eliminated
(ckaji), where as for agentives, lasna is just jorne+BAI, in
particular {gau}. Isn't that what you said was your definition of
synonymous, eyeonous?

doi la tsani, I just discovered http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Synonyms and http://www.lojban.org/tiki/%27%27Gismu%27%27+Agentive+And+Non-Agentive

It would be nice if you create another page and add your solutions.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm afraid no one is really understanding what I'm trying to get across.
With my list, I'm simply saying that a lot of gismu can be "removed"
by virtue of the fact that they're simply an agentive version, a
volitional version, or an implicitly tensed version of another gismu.
A few can be reduced into djuno, and some can almost be eliminated
(ckaji), where as for agentives, lasna is just jorne+BAI, in
particular {gau}. Isn't that what you said was your definition of
synonymous, eyeonous?

No, because we are only considering gismu, and you are talking about lujvo. I also said I only consider them synonyms if they can be made into each other using /only/ FA, SE, zi'o, and BAI.

Secondly, the issue is regarding gleki's assertion that nearly 1000 of the current ~1300 gismu could be completely eliminated because they are synonyms of /other/ gismu.
 

[Jacob Errington]

Are you trying to tell me that lasna isn't not jorne + gau ?
catra is morsi + gau

As you must definitely be aware, [gau] is a BAI. Therefore, according
to your own logic, these are synonymous.
Also, if you're allowing *BAI* to produce synonyms, how come NAhE
isn't? Seems to me like it should, because there're quite a few
antonymous gismu.

Not to mention the "subjective/objective" gismu such as:
-dukse and bancu
-carmi and mutce
-lerci and balvi

I have found no way to convert these into one another.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[John E. Clifford]

Lojban is not -- and never was intended to be -- a philosophical language, in which everything received a appropriate name derived from a few "semantic primes".  If gismu overlap, this is typically because natural languages have found it Convenient to have more than one word in that area.  Lojban has generally followed these natural patterns (with notable exceptions, like 'klama').  Probably more overall simplicity could be achieved by adding gismu even with overlaps (most words in English can be replaced by other words or short phrases in the intricate  cycles of definitions).

Sent from my iPad

[Jacob Errington]

I'm not suggesting that we should remove any overlapping gismu.
I'm simply stating that Lojban does have some semanic primitives in it
already, from which a lot of the more complex ideas can be created.
The whole purpose of lujvo is that, isn't it? complex-word?

When we encounter a new idea that can't be readily expressed by a
lujvo, then it shold be assigned a gismu if only the concept is deemed
universal enough. A skilled lojbanist should be confortable with *all*
the gismu, which is why that list shouldn't be extended at all if
possible. Any new ideas that deserve single words, but that aren't
important enough, should be added in the form of zi'evla because the
morphological properties of these words signal to the listener that
the word isn't one that he or she should necessary already know. Then
ensues the [ki'a]-phase, after which the speaker can give some kind
explanation using gismu. Skilled lojbanists would also know all the
rafsi, such that unknown, new lujvo (not necessarily ad hoc ones) can
be at least somewhat understood without having to break the flow of
speech with a ki'a, as is probably necessary for new zi'evla.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[Jorge Llambías]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not to mention the "subjective/objective" gismu such as:
> -dukse and bancu
> -carmi and mutce
> -lerci and balvi
>
> I have found no way to convert these into one another.

How about something like:

ko'a dukse ko'e ko'i = ko'a zmadu lo jai se kanpe ko'e ma'i ko'i
ko'a lerci ko'e = ko'a balvi lo jai se kanpe ma'i ko'e
ko'a carmi ko'e ko'i = ko'i ganse lo nu ko'a mutce ko'e

mu'o mi'e xorxes

[gleki]

>>Lojban is not -- and never was intended to be -- a philosophical language, in which everything received a appropriate name derived from a few "semantic primes". If gismu overlap, this is typically because natural languages have found it Convenient to have more than one word in that area. Lojban has generally followed these natural patterns (with notable exceptions, like 'klama'). Probably more overall simplicity could be achieved by adding gismu even with overlaps (most words in English can be replaced by other words or short phrases in the intricate cycles of definitions).

It's always nice to see posts from really great people here ))).
Are there any drafts of what Natural Semantic Metalanguage might look like? Will it be convenient to use in everyday life?
In tokipona it's extremely hard to distinguish between e.g. "spoon" and "fork".

ta'onai I didn't mean that one gismu can be converted into another gismu using only a handful of cmavo.
I meant what la tsani and others later presented here.
galfi fi lo jorne / jorne gasnu/jongau instead of lasna etc.

[gleki]

>>Lojban is not -- and never was intended to be -- a philosophical language, in which everything received a appropriate name derived from a few "semantic primes". If gismu overlap, this is typically because natural languages have found it Convenient to have more than one word in that area. Lojban has generally followed these natural patterns (with notable exceptions, like 'klama'). Probably more overall simplicity could be achieved by adding gismu even with overlaps (most words in English can be replaced by other words or short phrases in the intricate cycles of definitions).

It's always nice to see posts from really great people here ))).

[John E. Clifford]

Look up nsm on Wikipedia for a good list of available basic and applied paper. See my comments at LCC 1 for some problems ( but I think Wikipedia has a more thorough list).
Spoon is ilo moku poki, fork is ilo moku palisa.

Sent from my iPad

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/a_gLICOrpzoJ.

[la .lindar.]

Regarding {jongau} vs. {lasna} I wouldn't use the latter for connecting to a server, where I've used the former for the very same. {mi jongau fi le samse'u} but not {mi lasna fi le samse'u} because I'm not physically strapping myself to it.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

Are you trying to tell me that lasna isn't not jorne + gau ?
catra is morsi + gau

I'm not trying to tell you anything.
 

As you must definitely be aware, [gau] is a BAI. Therefore, according
to your own logic, these are synonymous.
Also, if you're allowing *BAI* to produce synonyms, how come NAhE
isn't?

 

Because when the difference between two valsi is that one lacks one or more places found in the other, it is obviously necessary to add these places in order to convert the former to the latter:

ko'a cliva ko'e ko'i = ko'a klama zi'o ko'e ko'i zi'o

ko'a sexetese klama ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u = ko'a cliva ko'i ko'u seka'a ko'e xeka'a go'u

NAhE are scalars. They change the meaning of the selbri itself, rather than merely changing the place structure of the bridi.

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

Are you trying to tell me that lasna isn't not jorne + gau ?
catra is morsi + gau

I'm not trying to tell you anything.
 

As you must definitely be aware, [gau] is a BAI. Therefore, according
to your own logic, these are synonymous.
Also, if you're allowing *BAI* to produce synonyms, how come NAhE
isn't?

 

Because when the difference between two valsi is that one lacks one or more places found in the other, it is obviously necessary to add these places in order to convert the former to the latter:

ko'a cliva ko'e ko'i = ko'a klama zi'o ko'e ko'i zi'o

ko'a sexetese klama ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u = ko'a cliva ko'i ko'u seka'a ko'e xeka'a ko'u

NAhE are scalars. They change the meaning of the selbri itself, rather than merely changing the place structure of the bridi.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

catra is morsi + gau

Not exactly. morsi + gau doesn't have the "by action/method" x3 of catra. It would be better approximated by morsi + gau + ta'i

[Jonathan Jones]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:

ko'a sexetese klama ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u = ko'a cliva ko'i ko'u seka'a ko'e xeka'a ko'u

I would like to amend the above to something involving less SE:

ko'a klama ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u = ko'a cliva seka'a ko'e ko'i ko'o xeka'a ko'u

[MorphemeAddict]

Jacob, why do you care if there are redundant gismu? 

stevo

[Jorge Llambías]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ko'a cliva ko'e ko'i = ko'a klama zi'o ko'e ko'i zi'o

I think you need to add "co'a" there:

ko'a cliva ko'e ko'i = ko'a co'a klama zi'o ko'e ko'i zi'o

cliva is only the start of klama. Once cliva is over, klama can still
continue for quite a while.

[Jacob Errington]

Stevo, simple. Because of what gleki said:
>You probably will want to see the list of definitions of the rest of the gismu as combinations of the selected 340.

There're probably more than 340 semantic primitives in Lojban, but
it's highly likely that all the other more complex gismu *can* be
reduced into a much smaller set of "core" gismu. Then, in my opinion,
gismu should only be added at this point if that new concept is not
readily expressible as a combination of preexisting gismu and is a
very universal concept. If the concept is not universal, then it
should merit a zi'evla, because all skilled lojbanists should be
expected to know at least the whole gimste.

Note that I've already said all of the second part of that.

[Jonathan Jones]

Well, yes, sure, but that's not important to the point I was attempting to make.

[MorphemeAddict]

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Jacob Errington <nict...@gmail.com> wrote:

Stevo, simple. Because of what gleki said:
>You probably will want to see the list of definitions of the rest of the gismu as combinations of the selected 340.

There're probably more than 340 semantic primitives in Lojban,

How do you define a semantic primitive? According to NSM, there are only about 63 semantic primitives.

stevo

 

but
it's highly likely that all the other more complex gismu *can* be
reduced into a much smaller set of "core" gismu. Then, in my opinion,
gismu should only be added at this point if that new concept is not
readily expressible as a combination of preexisting gismu and is a
very universal concept. If the concept is not universal, then it
should merit a zi'evla, because all skilled lojbanists should be
expected to know at least the whole gimste.

Note that I've already said all of the second part of that.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[Jacob Errington]

I didn't know about NSM when I made my post.
I was going along the lines of "basic idea", but I figure that for the
language to actually be productive, there needs to be more than just
63 gismu, which is why I'm all for making new ones, if and only if
it's to get at concepts that are difficult to express with a lujvo and
that are universal enough to not be a zi'evla.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

[gleki]

>>How do you define a semantic primitive? According to NSM, there are only about 63 semantic primitives.

pe'i the list of prims is not complete and is not likely to be complete in the nearest future.
Also this list looks more what Anna Wierzbicka suggested many years ago.

.ueru'e, no progress since then?
Then it won't be finished even in 100 years if mi'o lazni.

[MorphemeAddict]

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 5:04 AM, gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>How do you define a semantic primitive? According to NSM, there are only about 63 semantic primitives.

pe'i the list of prims is not complete and is not likely to be complete in the nearest future.
Also this list looks more what Anna Wierzbicka suggested many years ago.

I agree it's technically not complete, but people have been working on it nonstop since the project started, and there are no more easy primitives. Indeed, the list may actually be complete, but such can't be proven. OTOH, even if many more (30?) primitives are found, that's still less than 100.  

.ueru'e, no progress since then?
Then it won't be finished even in 100 years if mi'o lazni.

There has been continuous work on this project. But it will likely never be complete, in the same sense that a natlang is never complete. 

stevo 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/_WcsInrKuygJ.

[gleki]

>>There has been continuous work on this project. But it will likely never be complete, in the same sense that a natlang is never complete.

Can you tell me what prims were discovered each decade since the work started?
Or at least what are the most recent prims?
The links to articles will be enough.

ta'o mi se spaji that definitions of the prims look like "normal" dictionary. Where are our lovely sumti places???
Can't believe that cuz I always thought that lojban was based on something globally universal.
And this is what common sense tells.
5 sumti of {klama} may be non-natural but 2 sumti of {spaji} are definitely universal.

.e'u we should rewrite the list making a more usable version with sumti.

substantives
I, YOU, SOMEONE, PEOPLE, SOMETHING/THING, BODY
relational substantives
KIND, PART
determiners
THIS, THE SAME, OTHER/ELSE
quantifiers
ONE, TWO, MUCH/MANY, SOME, ALL
evaluators
GOOD, BAD
descriptors
BIG, SMALL
mental predicates
THINK, KNOW, WANT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR
speech
SAY, WORDS, TRUE
actions, events, movement, contact
DO, HAPPEN, MOVE, TOUCH
location, existence, possession, specification
BE (SOMEWHERE), THERE IS, HAVE, BE (SOMEONE/SOMETHING)
life and death
LIVE, DIE
time
WHEN/TIME, NOW, BEFORE, AFTER, A LONG TIME, A SHORT TIME, FOR SOME TIME, MOMENT
space
WHERE/PLACE, HERE, ABOVE, BELOW, FAR, NEAR, SIDE, INSIDE
logical concepts
NOT, MAYBE, CAN, BECAUSE, IF
intensifier, augmentor
VERY, MORE
similarity
LIKE/WAY