From bpfk-list+bncCK30vq5WENm72OgEGgTyfl6C@googlegroups.com Sat Dec 25 08:37:55 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PWX7v-0002N1-DN; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:55 -0800 Received: by mail-pw0-f61.google.com with SMTP id 2sf1492403pwi.16 for ; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :user-agent:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i6uUqeMY/wF1oCsv85lm4U0icBvJAfpTroOSl6YF37g=; b=AsK22G6IftW70dVtl286PACQYy+6QhTsELRa0+Y7VXJDnfHtGQ/PHsU4KdBKdKjYcc WRmo00EaAieJLFcpIbkdLZNthjOkosz7niC6JOItKn+pSayfQSpmOJIZzv/6kyaFEvO8 /4kv1Sigx4h3J/Xcu3Z+g+zCIH6VP88dcQv48= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding; b=c9EeD1W6K8uvdAU54sBcMY71f4bdPSNOAH0ywB57CLMkjhKnZLMje4EwGI427zHqgh 8xbxGtZgMkoWml0LPHlgpzBWXOVLChlAScD+UAgFrTVxkgSkq7O8wN+tvhAR/X56jzU4 PZFfbtotCcNO3Pb3ItGoFALds9+8DpaNlF7Tc= Received: by 10.142.149.20 with SMTP id w20mr532016wfd.52.1293295065291; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:45 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.2.41 with SMTP id 41ls11750955wfb.0.p; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.156.3 with SMTP id d3mr2653798wfe.66.1293295065043; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.156.3 with SMTP id d3mr2653797wfe.66.1293295065011; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (digitalkingdom.org [173.13.139.234]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p40si10809958wfc.6.2010.12.25.08.37.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:45 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of nobody@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) client-ip=173.13.139.234; Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PWX7o-0002OJ-4w for bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:44 -0800 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PWX7n-0002OC-QI for bpfk@lojban.org; Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:43 -0800 Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 08:37:43 -0800 From: Robin Lee Powell To: bpfk@lojban.org Subject: Re: [bpfk] lololol whole section missing? Message-ID: <20101225163743.GD29638@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: bpfk@lojban.org References: <20101225162920.GA29638@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101225162920.GA29638@digitalkingdom.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Original-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of nobody@digitalkingdom.org designates 173.13.139.234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=nobody@digitalkingdom.org Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In case the implicit question wasn't obvious: Should I put this back in? Same with the other one. -Robin On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 08:29:20AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > Not sure how I missed this on the last run, but the Red Book has: >=20 > - -------------------------- >=20 >
4)
Any gismu forms that conflicted with existing gismu were remo= ved. Obviously, being identical with an existing gismu cons > titutes a conflict. In addition, a proposed gismu that was identical to a= n existing gismu except for the final vowel was considered > a conflict, since two such gismu would have identical 4-letter rafsi. > >

XE "gismu: too-similar" XE "gismu: cr > eation, proscribed gismu pairs" >

More subtly: If the proposed gismu was identical to an existing g= ismu except for a single consonant, and the consonant was " > too similar=94 based on the following table, then the proposed gismu was = rejected. >

>

proposed gismu existing gismu >

>

b p, v > c j, s > d t > f p, v > g k, x > j c, z > k g, x > l r > m n > n m > p b, f > r l > s c, z > t d > v b, f > x g, k > z j, s >
>

See Section 4 for an example. >

>

> XE "gismu: creation, a= nd transcription blunders" >

5)
The gismu form with the highest score usually became the actu= al gismu. Sometimes a lower-scoring form was used to provid > e a better rafsi. A few gismu were changed in error as a result of transc= ription blunders (for example, the gismu "gismu=94 should hav > e been "gicmu=94, but it's too late to fix it now). >
>

XE "gismu: source-language = weights for" The language weights used to make most of th > e gismu were as follows: >

> 

   Chinese 0.36
>         English 0.21
>         Hindi           0.16
>         Spanish 0.11
>         Russian 0.09
>         Arabic          0.07
>
reflecting 1985 number-of-speakers data. A few gism= u were made much later

>

using updated weights:
>

>

Chinese 0.347 > Hindi 0.196 > English 0.160 > Spanish 0.123 > Russian 0.089 > Arabic 0.085 >
>

(English and Hindi switched places due to demographic changes.) >

> Note that the stressed vowel of the gismu was considered sufficiently dis= tinctive that two or more gismu may differ only in this vowel; as an extrem= e example, "bradi=94, "bredi=94, "bridi=94, and "brodi=94 (but fortunately = not "brudi=94) are all existing gismu. >=20 > - -------------------------- >=20 > Now, dag-cll in the same place: >=20 > Any gismu forms that conflicted with existing gismu were = removed. Obviously, being identical with an existing gismu constitutes a co= nflict. In addition, a proposed gismu that was identical to an existing gis= mu except for the final vowel was considered a conflict, since two such gis= mu would have identical 4-letter rafsi. > > > > 5) > > The gismu form with the highest score usually became the = actual gismu. Sometimes a lower-scoring form was used to provide a better r= afsi. A few gismu were changed in error as a result of transcription blunde= rs (for example, the gismu > gismu should have been > gicmu, but it's too late to fix it now). > > > > Note that the stressed vowel of the gismu was considered suffic= iently distinctive that two or more gismu may differ only in this vowel; as= an extreme example, >=20 > - -------------------------- >=20 > You'll notice that this is just a teensy-weensy difference, and that > dag-cll is Rather Shorter. >=20 > What do I do with this? >=20 > -Robin >=20 > --=20 > http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. > Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot > is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" > is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ >=20 > --=20 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= "BPFK" group. > To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googl= egroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk= -list?hl=3Den. >=20 --=20 http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.