Received: from 173-13-139-235-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.13.139.235]:44080 helo=jukni.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1catPd-00038G-CM for jbovlaste-admin@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:13:42 -0800 Received: by jukni.digitalkingdom.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:13:37 -0800 From: "Apache" To: curtis289@att.net Reply-To: webmaster@lojban.org Subject: [jvsw] Definition Edited At Word vlakamsmi -- By krtisfranks Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 16:13:37 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.5 X-Spam_score_int: 5 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "vlakamsmi" in the language "English". Differences: 2,2c2,2 < $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_3$. --- > $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they all mean esentially one common thing $x_3$ and are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_4$. 5,5c5,5 < Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a minimal pair which distinguishes paired phonés, then any strings which nominally differ in only such pairs will belong to $x_2$ of this word in that language. But even with minimal pairs, some words may not be distinguishable. This word refers to indistinguishability in the form of a word as well as its meaning/usage; so, homophones are not necessarily similar in this sense, nor are synonyms. In English, phonation duration and, in some cases, certain phonation qualities (such as tonation, voicing, nasalation, place of articulation, aspiration, etc. (again: only in some cases)) do not distinguish words. In Lojban, phonation duration (such as ".{yyy} " versus merely ".{y} "; but notice that some transcriptions are interpreted as producing multiphthongs/glides/syllabification, so ".{iii} " is distinct from mere ".{i} ") and minor differences in place of articulation (trilled "r" versus English "r", for example) and sometimes voicing (for nasals, rhotics, laterals, and presently xy) do not produce word distinctions; so, they will generate such similarities in Lojban. Additionally any pair of words which come into {gimkamsmikezypro} (or similar for {zi'evla}) in Lojban have such a similarity in Lojban. --- > Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a [...] Content analysis details: (0.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: lojban.org] 1.4 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available. [173.13.139.235 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org] -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 1.0 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with dynamic-looking rDNS In jbovlaste, the user krtisfranks has edited a definition of "vlakamsmi" in the language "English". Differences: 2,2c2,2 < $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_3$. --- > $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they all mean esentially one common thing $x_3$ and are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_4$. 5,5c5,5 < Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a minimal pair which distinguishes paired phonés, then any strings which nominally differ in only such pairs will belong to $x_2$ of this word in that language. But even with minimal pairs, some words may not be distinguishable. This word refers to indistinguishability in the form of a word as well as its meaning/usage; so, homophones are not necessarily similar in this sense, nor are synonyms. In English, phonation duration and, in some cases, certain phonation qualities (such as tonation, voicing, nasalation, place of articulation, aspiration, etc. (again: only in some cases)) do not distinguish words. In Lojban, phonation duration (such as ".{yyy} " versus merely ".{y} "; but notice that some transcriptions are interpreted as producing multiphthongs/glides/syllabification, so ".{iii} " is distinct from mere ".{i} ") and minor differences in place of articulation (trilled "r" versus English "r", for example) and sometimes voicing (for nasals, rhotics, laterals, and presently xy) do not produce word distinctions; so, they will generate such similarities in Lojban. Additionally any pair of words which come into {gimkamsmikezypro} (or similar for {zi'evla}) in Lojban have such a similarity in Lojban. --- > Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a minimal pair which distinguishes paired phonés, then any strings which nominally differ in only such pairs will belong to $x_2$ of this word in that language; in other words allophonic but not phonemic differences produce such similarities. But even with minimal pairs, some words may not be distinguishable. This word refers to indistinguishability in the form of a word as well as its meaning/usage; so, homophones are not necessarily similar in this sense, nor are synonyms. The combination of both qualities does produce such similarities in spoken English (not necessarily written English, since the orthography is not phonemic). In English, phonation duration and, in some cases, certain phonation qualities (such as tonation, voicing, nasalation, place of articulation, aspiration, etc. (again: only in some cases)) do not distinguish words. Dialectal differences usually produce such similarities too (a U.S. English speaker and a UK English speaker will say the word "car" differently but will agree about everything concerning it, including its rhyming qualities in their dialects, its meaning, and its spelling). In Lojban, phonation duration (such as ".{yyy} " versus merely ".{y} "; but notice that some transcriptions are interpreted as producing multiphthongs/glides/syllabification, so ".{iii} " is distinct from mere ".{i} ") and minor differences in place of articulation (trilled "r" versus English "r", for example) and sometimes voicing (for nasals, rhotics, laterals, and presently xy) do not produce word distinctions; so, they will generate such similarities in Lojban. Additionally any pair of words which come into {gimkamsmikezypro} (or similar for {zi'evla}) in Lojban have such a similarity in Lojban. Old Data: Definition: $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_3$. Notes: Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a minimal pair which distinguishes paired phonés, then any strings which nominally differ in only such pairs will belong to $x_2$ of this word in that language. But even with minimal pairs, some words may not be distinguishable. This word refers to indistinguishability in the form of a word as well as its meaning/usage; so, homophones are not necessarily similar in this sense, nor are synonyms. In English, phonation duration and, in some cases, certain phonation qualities (such as tonation, voicing, nasalation, place of articulation, aspiration, etc. (again: only in some cases)) do not distinguish words. In Lojban, phonation duration (such as ".{yyy} " versus merely ".{y} "; but notice that some transcriptions are interpreted as producing multiphthongs/glides/syllabification, so ".{iii} " is distinct from mere ".{i} ") and minor differences in place of articulation (trilled "r" versus English "r", for example) and sometimes voicing (for nasals, rhotics, laterals, and presently xy) do not produce word distinctions; so, they will generate such similarities in Lojban. Additionally any pair of words which come into {gimkamsmikezypro} (or similar for {zi'evla}) in Lojban have such a similarity in Lojban. Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: word similarity, In Sense: Place Keywords: New Data: Definition: $x_1$ is the similarity relation between all members of set $x_2$ (set of quoted words) such that they all mean esentially one common thing $x_3$ and are considered to be identical in any meaningful way in language $x_4$. Notes: Members of $x_2$ need to be formally different words (could be expressed in IPA or careful pronunciation); some of them may not be, as transcribed, proper words in the language. If a language lacks a minimal pair which distinguishes paired phonés, then any strings which nominally differ in only such pairs will belong to $x_2$ of this word in that language; in other words allophonic but not phonemic differences produce such similarities. But even with minimal pairs, some words may not be distinguishable. This word refers to indistinguishability in the form of a word as well as its meaning/usage; so, homophones are not necessarily similar in this sense, nor are synonyms. The combination of both qualities does produce such similarities in spoken English (not necessarily written English, since the orthography is not phonemic). In English, phonation duration and, in some cases, certain phonation qualities (such as tonation, voicing, nasalation, place of articulation, aspiration, etc. (again: only in some cases)) do not distinguish words. Dialectal differences usually produce such similarities too (a U.S. English speaker and a UK English speaker will say the word "car" differently but will agree about everything concerning it, including its rhyming qualities in their dialects, its meaning, and its spelling). In Lojban, phonation duration (such as ".{yyy} " versus merely ".{y} "; but notice that some transcriptions are interpreted as producing multiphthongs/glides/syllabification, so ".{iii} " is distinct from mere ".{i} ") and minor differences in place of articulation (trilled "r" versus English "r", for example) and sometimes voicing (for nasals, rhotics, laterals, and presently xy) do not produce word distinctions; so, they will generate such similarities in Lojban. Additionally any pair of words which come into {gimkamsmikezypro} (or similar for {zi'evla}) in Lojban have such a similarity in Lojban. Jargon: Gloss Keywords: Word: word similarity, In Sense: Place Keywords: You can go to to see it.