Received: from mail-we0-f192.google.com ([74.125.82.192]:60209) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TuUDM-0000tg-La; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:48 -0800 Received: by mail-we0-f192.google.com with SMTP id z53sf1367011wey.29 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:x-received:received-spf :x-ct-class:x-ct-score:x-ct-refid:x-ct-spam:x-authority-analysis :x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=CplFb700f6zD5OgyPDR8X11S3d1Tg5GOWlcCUyV/z8Y=; b=t2JIwY49xPjRzN2AHCajkFf/HMZQcrx+59lze7REJ653ezq5hTpQ3J1U5uwAqRswf0 MNl8LS0vo+n6UOXwtsGTZ07YzBfI7TjGqurJJcZbWEqR9UtAYOF7aMB8YUoC2Sj29/8A pK/9km/Ppq2Gi89qswAUP0OGH8SXYt4xx2HNS2hsI1/Mqe09YknydH9KyiwT+dblRJNN YVkjriOZEONq9qLzhV1wUBRbMPQd9kiVbi4wZdJMxCYcS4swsLOffieY8HKOwrFlhrKs OvCo6dq4r3mcASCZCXdeSkbeoVDWxXJyvGh5aHLf43adEyd1FBQuWqQAAte35lH6nb1N Fgug== X-Received: by 10.180.91.230 with SMTP id ch6mr1068274wib.11.1358109084803; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:24 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.101.132 with SMTP id fg4ls984536wib.8.gmail; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:24 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.204.128.65 with SMTP id j1mr4060658bks.7.1358109084107; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:24 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.204.128.65 with SMTP id j1mr4060657bks.7.1358109084090; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from eastrmfepo201.cox.net (eastrmfepo201.cox.net. [68.230.241.216]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id j28si944981bkv.0.2013.01.13.12.31.23; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:31:23 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.216 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.216; Received: from eastrmimpo209 ([68.230.241.224]) by eastrmfepo201.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20130113203122.XENJ17456.eastrmfepo201.cox.net@eastrmimpo209> for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:31:22 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([98.169.148.216]) by eastrmimpo209 with cox id nYXN1k00D4gNKFm01YXNxy; Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:31:22 -0500 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020206.50F3199A.00CD,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=E5JPVNhl c=1 sm=1 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:17 a=YsUzL_8ObRgA:10 a=TCguNf5P3WYA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=ihsrFBjg3AkA:10 a=m8R5DpO9IOVbkDgbXDgA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=dxBpO5_FDU0A:10 a=oMUrf2L0cPa+6Alu0knKiQ==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <50F3199A.7070903@lojban.org> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 15:31:22 -0500 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] What is the source of gismu *definitions*? References: In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.216 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / Ian Johnson wrote: > This really only covers morphology in significant detail, the actual > choice of the words from the source languages as well as the way in > which the place structures of the words were created are rather > undocumented, to my knowledge. The choice of the words from source languages is fully documented, but not in a net-available form. I have a thick binder with one handwritten form page per 1 to 4 words showing precisely what the etymologies were that we considered, and that were actually used. An abbreviated form showing what was finally used is in a file on the Lojban web site somewhere. The handwritten pages could in theory be scanned, but it would take forever, and many pages have notes on the back-side that would be hard to correlate with the separate front-side pages if they got separated. There are also page summaries of the Lojbanization rules. I also have all of the dictionaries we used and could therefore probably reconstruct what I did for four of the six languages. I cannot read the Hindi and Arabic alphabets, and hence would have to rely on Tommy Whitlock for those languages, since again we still have the dictionaries and he lives locally. The place structure evolution is undocumented, except to the extent that we have the TLI word lists and some of the early Lojban word lists. showing what the status quo was at those times. (I probably have many more word lists archived in backup files on hundreds of old 5" floppy disks, but I don't have the backup program, even if the disks are still readable.) There is probably more stuff in the archives than I can specifically recall, because my policy as archivist has been to try to save everything that was written in a savable form. But at this point 25 year old unindexed archives are probably of little use. It would take someone hundreds of hours to put the archives in a form where they could be productively used to research, and the desire for such comes up too infrequently to make it anyone's priority. I did leave one other source of place structure evolutionary changes in my last post. Relatively late in the process, in the early 90s (probably there is a trace on Lojban List), the concept of sumti-raising arose. This problem was originally discussed in snail mail letters between pc and me (much early Lojban design is documented in those snail mails, all of which I kept - but finding which ones are important to any given concept is rather difficult). I did a thorough review looking for gismu places that relied on raised sumti, and that is when so many x2 and x3 places were changed from a simple description to an abstraction (such as has been discussed with sisku). Probably a couple hundred place structures were changed in that review, and they can be found be looking for explicit mentions of abstraction places in the list. Before that review, very few gismu were expressed in terms of abstractions. lojbab -- Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.