Received: from mail-vb0-f56.google.com ([209.85.212.56]:62527)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncBDULZ54LZAMRBBVZ2KDQKGQENOQA3SA@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1Tutyv-0003q5-UO; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:39 -0800
Received: by mail-vb0-f56.google.com with SMTP id s24sf2585582vbi.21
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:15 -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:subject
         :from:to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version
         :x-mailer: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=swFuisJGbEsrtzbxsMHh92wTugftFnZEDMUp0HOwShc=;
        b=RLVo5Na05rlbUR/zKTZ8Gjyv+5ZSVy/AqBnn1INZ0hkKpkxDoJ/ZdR/yR28fj4QcPy
         aJvjRLvfoIgp2jHbqKysBsA5XWUISXFX2TZas8xVfLDVI30QfkPUl0zf+pKwfgNiRlAH
         tmLTLUHUk7KVjpqX/TsZRo93XBFyf0uX3jV7Tq2UFVxFjL6Ic7B17zAeotOxZwZZ+gNA
         hD+6+zbtQuEr0Xnu8kurmYI8UmGmxU+xEhHvZyriZE3nF3cB0rLSrwStTJx4Jynp9+kA
         reqe4iwQ4PCEQUUTepBffzpNqzE0+wQPMry7Qie+EKdvOOOmfmbPIO67Rp/auqSBZntx
         wfnQ==
X-Received: by 10.50.171.100 with SMTP id at4mr139047igc.6.1358208134999;
        Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.50.37.141 with SMTP id y13ls2569294igj.4.canary; Mon, 14 Jan
 2013 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.66.80.34 with SMTP id o2mr11368341pax.9.1358208134404;
        Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.66.80.34 with SMTP id o2mr11368340pax.9.1358208134378;
        Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net (pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net. [207.69.200.58])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id ab9si3252844pbd.1.2013.01.14.16.02.14;
        Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:02:14 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 207.69.200.58 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of rslau@mindspring.com) client-ip=207.69.200.58;
Received: from [209.179.87.175] (helo=[192.168.0.102])
	by pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
	id 1Tutyn-0004JK-00
	for lojban@googlegroups.com; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:02:13 -0500
Subject: Re: [lojban] What is the source of gismu *definitions*?
From: Robert Slaughter <rslau@mindspring.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
In-Reply-To: <1704f503-32c7-48cf-9b68-4c438948385d@googlegroups.com>
References: <d21ad182-d52e-4a61-8975-1c6f53d75211@googlegroups.com>
	 <50F2D56C.8040405@lojban.org>
	 <1704f503-32c7-48cf-9b68-4c438948385d@googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:28:01 -0500
Message-ID: <1358202481.2304.7.camel@thomas>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3
X-Original-Sender: rslau@mindspring.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=neutral
 (google.com: 207.69.200.58 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess
 record for domain of rslau@mindspring.com) smtp.mail=rslau@mindspring.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-w5RvSfXtUFYShykkS1QC"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

--=-w5RvSfXtUFYShykkS1QC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 06:50 -0800, la gleki wrote:

> doi lojbab mi ckire do .io lo ka ciksi so'a da
>=20
>=20
>=20
> As usual this topic is turning into a rant. But that was predictable
> and unavoidable.
Reading lojbab's email, I find it a detailed and informative look at how
the gismu list was started and the initial gismu were formed, including
warts. If you consider this a "rant", then it appears there really isn't
much need for me to read any more emails from you. I would be willing to
consider otherwise, if you can demonstrate useful work you have
contributed. The "lojban berries" is almost the most useless thing I can
think of -- *of course* "ckule" looks and sounds like "school" -- it was
derived from "school / schule" and the other words from the target
languages for *maximum phonetic recognition*.=20

> On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:40:28 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:
>=20
>         la gleki wrote:=20
>         > Every Lojbanist understands that gismu denote predicates
>         that are highly=20
>         > practical.=20
>         > e.g. {pilno} includes a goal as pilno3. Indeed, how can we
>         imagine using=20
>         > something without a goal?=20
>         >=20
>         > My question is who collected those definitions?=20
>        =20
>         Me.=20
>        =20
>         > Was it JCB?=20
>        =20
>          > How was this gimste formed?=20
>        =20
>         JCB set the place structures for the TLI Loglan words.  His
>         general=20
>         philosophy of doing so was set forth in his books Loglan 1 and
>         Loglan 2,=20
>         though he didn't always follow his own principles.=20
>        =20
>         I started with JCB's list, but greatly modified it, both
>         adding and=20
>         deleting words.  As such, there are half-again as many gismu
>         as there=20
>         were in TLI Loglan of the time.  In very few cases can I tell
>         you for=20
>         certain the specific reason I added certain words, though for
>         the=20
>         culture words I made an attempt to be systematic.  A large
>         chunk was=20
>         added in 1988 as a result of Athelstan doing a thorough
>         analysis based=20
>         on Roget's thesaurus, to make sure that we had good coverage
>         of all=20
>         semantic domains.=20
>        =20
>         During the period from about 1990-1994, I subjected all change
>         proposals=20
>         to the LogFest attendees, representing the community, for
>         approval.  In=20
>         the latter two years, a faction emerged favoring the
>         elimination of some=20
>         gismu and thus keeping the total number constant, in the face
>         of new=20
>         proposals, if not shrinking.  One last group of new ones was
>         approved,=20
>         and the list was frozen.  Many years passed before any word
>         was proposed=20
>         with significant justification, thus suggesting that this
>         decision was=20
>         correct.  (If no one has really needed a word in 25 odd years
>         of use, it=20
>         is hard to argue that it is fundamental, even if it might be
>         useful.)=20
>        =20
>         Place structures started with JCB's general pattern.  I
>         attempted to=20
>         find patterns, and then to make words of similar semantic
>         domain=20
>         consistent.  Thus all plant and animal gismu were to have a
>         species=20
>         place.  I eventually got things fairly systematic, though I
>         made some=20
>         mistakes.  At that point, pretty much no one besides me was
>         looking that=20
>         closely.=20
>        =20
>         I strongly avoided one-place predicates.=20
>        =20
>         But at one point, I realized I was going too far, ascribing to
>         any=20
>         possible tool a purpose, and to any object both material and
>         form=20
>         places.  I backed off from this somewhat.  I thus avoided >5
>         place=20
>         predicates.  At about this point, the current concept of BAI
>         started to=20
>         emerge, and it was realized that a large number of places
>         were=20
>         superfluous.  I made one last pass, generally reducing many of
>         the=20
>         excess places I had added.=20
>        =20
>         Is there a changelog of modifications to gismu=20
>         > definitions starting from the first edition of loglan?=20
>        =20
>         Not hardly.  I introduced the concept of configuration
>         management in the=20
>         1988-1994 period, starting to document all changes once a
>         chunk of the=20
>         language was baselined.  Before it was baselined,
>         documentation was=20
>         rarely attempted, though there are some cases.  In only a few
>         cases do=20
>         we even have good copies of the evolving word lists - this was
>         still a=20
>         primarily paper and pencil project.=20
>        =20
>         > My particular interest here is with the recent discussion of
>         a possible=20
>         > new gismu meaning "qua". The corresponding word is of high
>         frequency in=20
>         > Mandarin but in European languages it is often confused with
>         words=20
>         > meaning {simsa}.=20
>         > e.g.=20
>         > "as" means both "like" and "qua".=20
>         > Russian "=D0=BA=D0=B0=D0=BA" [kak] means both "like" and "qua".=
=20
>        =20
>         I have no comment on the merits of this, other than to merely
>         observe=20
>         that many of the world's languages seem to do fine without
>         making a=20
>         distinction.=20
>        =20
>         The gismu list is baselined.  New gismu are not being
>         considered, and=20
>         there is no plan to do so in the future, though this could be
>         revisited=20
>         AFTER the existing language is fully documented.=20
>        =20
>         > Were Mandarin predicates taken into consideration while
>         constructing=20
>         > gismu definitions?=20
>        =20
>         Not that I know of.  I did the Mandarin work for Lojban, and I
>         don't=20
>         know Mandarin.=20
>        =20
>         More importantly, almost no consideration of semantics was
>         involved in=20
>         gismu-making.  If the basic meaning was generally covered,
>         that was good=20
>         enough.  It was expected that the meanings and place
>         structures would=20
>         evolve with usage.  (But by 1997, the community was tired of
>         my and=20
>         other senior Lojbanists changing the language by fiat.  The
>         community=20
>         wanted the language to stop changing in that matter.
>          Completely.  I=20
>         agreed with them.  We don't change the language by fiat
>         anymore.  The=20
>         only exception, adopted for byfy use, is that stuff which is
>         so broken=20
>         as to prevent good documentation of the status quo language,
>         could be=20
>         changed so as to allow that documentation.  (Since then,
>         sentiment seems=20
>         to have grown against "usage-based change" which is the other=20
>         alternative, and one that cannot really be prevented.  People
>         generally=20
>         are biased against change in language.  They want books that
>         are=20
>         prescriptive and unchanging, whereas lexicographers strongly
>         consider=20
>         dictionaries by nature to be descriptive rather than
>         prescriptive.)=20
>        =20
>        =20
>        =20
>         I did use some systematic techniques to try to be sure I was
>         picking the=20
>         correct root, and for a brief time, we had a native Mandarin
>         speaker who=20
>         looked over what I had done with approval. (A couple of
>         Mandarin=20
>         speakers since then have also said that the work I did was
>         more than=20
>         adequate, but they were generally comparing us to Esperanto
>         and other=20
>         Euroclone languages). I also used 3 different dictionaries in
>         the case=20
>         of Mandarin in order to be more certain, since Mandarin has
>         such a high=20
>         weight in Lojban word-making.  Still, there are flaws, and I
>         think my=20
>         choice for Lojbanization of Mandarin was especially bad, being
>         based=20
>         solely on the quasi-official Chinese description of the IPA=20
>         pronunciation of Chinese particles, and the system I used for
>         mapping=20
>         IPA in other languages.  As a result, Mandarin inputs had too
>         many "a"s=20
>         representing schwa, and too many fricatives were mapped to s
>         and c,=20
>         leading to Lojban having a "she sells sea shells" quality that
>         is hard=20
>         for some speakers, including me, to speak the language quickly
>         and=20
>         accurately.=20
>        =20
>         But I don't know enough Mandarin grammar to have any clue what
>         subjects=20
>         and objects any given Mandarin word might require (if any)  I
>         did enough=20
>         comparative linguistics study to be reasonably confident that
>         my=20
>         approach was "good enough".=20
>        =20
>         (Arabic is the other language where my word-making rules were
>         systematic=20
>         but led to a relatively poor result.  And since Arabic has the
>         lowest=20
>         weight of the 6 source languages, this meant that Arabic
>         influenced=20
>         relative few words, and its inputs were less useful to Arabic
>         speaking=20
>         Lojbanists.=20
>        =20
>         JCB may have had some native speaker inputs in the early days,
>         but my=20
>         general observations on his choices for word-making suggest
>         that they=20
>         were even more limited and flawed than my efforts.  I know
>         that we had=20
>         much better dictionaries by 1987 than JCB had in 1955.=20
>        =20
>         lojbab=20
>         --=20
>         Bob LeChevalier    loj...@lojban.org    www.lojban.org=20
>         President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.=20
>        =20
>        =20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> 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/-/nz86kpRVGjUJ.
> 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=3Den.


--=20
Bob Slaughter, rslauGUESS@WHATmindspring.com
http://www.facebook.com/robert.s.slaughter=20
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be
ruled by evil men." -- Plato
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing." -- Edmund Burke
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but
because of those who look on and do nothing." -- Albert Einstein

--=20
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@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.


--=-w5RvSfXtUFYShykkS1QC
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
  <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; CHARSET=3DUTF-8">
  <META NAME=3D"GENERATOR" CONTENT=3D"GtkHTML/3.28.3">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 06:50 -0800, la gleki wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE>
    doi lojbab mi ckire do .io lo ka ciksi so'a da
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE>
    <BR>
    <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE>
    As usual this topic is turning into a rant. But that was predictable an=
d unavoidable.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
Reading lojbab's email, I find it a detailed and informative look at how th=
e gismu list was started and the initial gismu were formed, including warts=
. If you consider this a &quot;rant&quot;, then it appears there really isn=
't much need for me to read any more emails from you. I would be willing to=
 consider otherwise, if you can demonstrate useful work you have contribute=
d. The &quot;lojban berries&quot; is almost the most useless thing I can th=
ink of -- *of course* &quot;ckule&quot; looks and sounds like &quot;school&=
quot; -- it was derived from &quot;school / schule&quot; and the other word=
s from the target languages for *maximum phonetic recognition*. <BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE>
    On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:40:28 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:<BR>
    <BLOCKQUOTE>
        la gleki wrote: <BR>
        &gt; Every Lojbanist understands that gismu denote predicates that =
are highly <BR>
        &gt; practical. <BR>
        &gt; e.g. {pilno} includes a goal as pilno3. Indeed, how can we ima=
gine using <BR>
        &gt; something without a goal? <BR>
        &gt; <BR>
        &gt; My question is who collected those definitions? <BR>
        <BR>
        Me. <BR>
        <BR>
        &gt; Was it JCB? <BR>
        <BR>
        &nbsp;&gt; How was this gimste formed? <BR>
        <BR>
        JCB set the place structures for the TLI Loglan words. &nbsp;His ge=
neral <BR>
        philosophy of doing so was set forth in his books Loglan 1 and Logl=
an 2, <BR>
        though he didn't always follow his own principles. <BR>
        <BR>
        I started with JCB's list, but greatly modified it, both adding and=
 <BR>
        deleting words. &nbsp;As such, there are half-again as many gismu a=
s there <BR>
        were in TLI Loglan of the time. &nbsp;In very few cases can I tell =
you for <BR>
        certain the specific reason I added certain words, though for the <=
BR>
        culture words I made an attempt to be systematic. &nbsp;A large chu=
nk was <BR>
        added in 1988 as a result of Athelstan doing a thorough analysis ba=
sed <BR>
        on Roget's thesaurus, to make sure that we had good coverage of all=
 <BR>
        semantic domains. <BR>
        <BR>
        During the period from about 1990-1994, I subjected all change prop=
osals <BR>
        to the LogFest attendees, representing the community, for approval.=
 &nbsp;In <BR>
        the latter two years, a faction emerged favoring the elimination of=
 some <BR>
        gismu and thus keeping the total number constant, in the face of ne=
w <BR>
        proposals, if not shrinking. &nbsp;One last group of new ones was a=
pproved, <BR>
        and the list was frozen. &nbsp;Many years passed before any word wa=
s proposed <BR>
        with significant justification, thus suggesting that this decision =
was <BR>
        correct. &nbsp;(If no one has really needed a word in 25 odd years =
of use, it <BR>
        is hard to argue that it is fundamental, even if it might be useful=
.) <BR>
        <BR>
        Place structures started with JCB's general pattern. &nbsp;I attemp=
ted to <BR>
        find patterns, and then to make words of similar semantic domain <B=
R>
        consistent. &nbsp;Thus all plant and animal gismu were to have a sp=
ecies <BR>
        place. &nbsp;I eventually got things fairly systematic, though I ma=
de some <BR>
        mistakes. &nbsp;At that point, pretty much no one besides me was lo=
oking that <BR>
        closely. <BR>
        <BR>
        I strongly avoided one-place predicates. <BR>
        <BR>
        But at one point, I realized I was going too far, ascribing to any =
<BR>
        possible tool a purpose, and to any object both material and form <=
BR>
        places. &nbsp;I backed off from this somewhat. &nbsp;I thus avoided=
 &gt;5 place <BR>
        predicates. &nbsp;At about this point, the current concept of BAI s=
tarted to <BR>
        emerge, and it was realized that a large number of places were <BR>
        superfluous. &nbsp;I made one last pass, generally reducing many of=
 the <BR>
        excess places I had added. <BR>
        <BR>
        Is there a changelog of modifications to gismu <BR>
        &gt; definitions starting from the first edition of loglan? <BR>
        <BR>
        Not hardly. &nbsp;I introduced the concept of configuration managem=
ent in the <BR>
        1988-1994 period, starting to document all changes once a chunk of =
the <BR>
        language was baselined. &nbsp;Before it was baselined, documentatio=
n was <BR>
        rarely attempted, though there are some cases. &nbsp;In only a few =
cases do <BR>
        we even have good copies of the evolving word lists - this was stil=
l a <BR>
        primarily paper and pencil project. <BR>
        <BR>
        &gt; My particular interest here is with the recent discussion of a=
 possible <BR>
        &gt; new gismu meaning &quot;qua&quot;. The corresponding word is o=
f high frequency in <BR>
        &gt; Mandarin but in European languages it is often confused with w=
ords <BR>
        &gt; meaning {simsa}. <BR>
        &gt; e.g. <BR>
        &gt; &quot;as&quot; means both &quot;like&quot; and &quot;qua&quot;=
. <BR>
        &gt; Russian &quot;&#1082;&#1072;&#1082;&quot; [kak] means both &qu=
ot;like&quot; and &quot;qua&quot;. <BR>
        <BR>
        I have no comment on the merits of this, other than to merely obser=
ve <BR>
        that many of the world's languages seem to do fine without making a=
 <BR>
        distinction. <BR>
        <BR>
        The gismu list is baselined. &nbsp;New gismu are not being consider=
ed, and <BR>
        there is no plan to do so in the future, though this could be revis=
ited <BR>
        AFTER the existing language is fully documented. <BR>
        <BR>
        &gt; Were Mandarin predicates taken into consideration while constr=
ucting <BR>
        &gt; gismu definitions? <BR>
        <BR>
        Not that I know of. &nbsp;I did the Mandarin work for Lojban, and I=
 don't <BR>
        know Mandarin. <BR>
        <BR>
        More importantly, almost no consideration of semantics was involved=
 in <BR>
        gismu-making. &nbsp;If the basic meaning was generally covered, tha=
t was good <BR>
        enough. &nbsp;It was expected that the meanings and place structure=
s would <BR>
        evolve with usage. &nbsp;(But by 1997, the community was tired of m=
y and <BR>
        other senior Lojbanists changing the language by fiat. &nbsp;The co=
mmunity <BR>
        wanted the language to stop changing in that matter. &nbsp;Complete=
ly. &nbsp;I <BR>
        agreed with them. &nbsp;We don't change the language by fiat anymor=
e. &nbsp;The <BR>
        only exception, adopted for byfy use, is that stuff which is so bro=
ken <BR>
        as to prevent good documentation of the status quo language, could =
be <BR>
        changed so as to allow that documentation. &nbsp;(Since then, senti=
ment seems <BR>
        to have grown against &quot;usage-based change&quot; which is the o=
ther <BR>
        alternative, and one that cannot really be prevented. &nbsp;People =
generally <BR>
        are biased against change in language. &nbsp;They want books that a=
re <BR>
        prescriptive and unchanging, whereas lexicographers strongly consid=
er <BR>
        dictionaries by nature to be descriptive rather than prescriptive.)=
 <BR>
        <BR>
        <BR>
        <BR>
        I did use some systematic techniques to try to be sure I was pickin=
g the <BR>
        correct root, and for a brief time, we had a native Mandarin speake=
r who <BR>
        looked over what I had done with approval. (A couple of Mandarin <B=
R>
        speakers since then have also said that the work I did was more tha=
n <BR>
        adequate, but they were generally comparing us to Esperanto and oth=
er <BR>
        Euroclone languages). I also used 3 different dictionaries in the c=
ase <BR>
        of Mandarin in order to be more certain, since Mandarin has such a =
high <BR>
        weight in Lojban word-making. &nbsp;Still, there are flaws, and I t=
hink my <BR>
        choice for Lojbanization of Mandarin was especially bad, being base=
d <BR>
        solely on the quasi-official Chinese description of the IPA <BR>
        pronunciation of Chinese particles, and the system I used for mappi=
ng <BR>
        IPA in other languages. &nbsp;As a result, Mandarin inputs had too =
many &quot;a&quot;s <BR>
        representing schwa, and too many fricatives were mapped to s and c,=
 <BR>
        leading to Lojban having a &quot;she sells sea shells&quot; quality=
 that is hard <BR>
        for some speakers, including me, to speak the language quickly and =
<BR>
        accurately. <BR>
        <BR>
        But I don't know enough Mandarin grammar to have any clue what subj=
ects <BR>
        and objects any given Mandarin word might require (if any) &nbsp;I =
did enough <BR>
        comparative linguistics study to be reasonably confident that my <B=
R>
        approach was &quot;good enough&quot;. <BR>
        <BR>
        (Arabic is the other language where my word-making rules were syste=
matic <BR>
        but led to a relatively poor result. &nbsp;And since Arabic has the=
 lowest <BR>
        weight of the 6 source languages, this meant that Arabic influenced=
 <BR>
        relative few words, and its inputs were less useful to Arabic speak=
ing <BR>
        Lojbanists. <BR>
        <BR>
        JCB may have had some native speaker inputs in the early days, but =
my <BR>
        general observations on his choices for word-making suggest that th=
ey <BR>
        were even more limited and flawed than my efforts. &nbsp;I know tha=
t we had <BR>
        much better dictionaries by 1987 than JCB had in 1955. <BR>
        <BR>
        lojbab <BR>
        -- <BR>
        Bob LeChevalier &nbsp; &nbsp;<A HREF=3D"javascript:">loj...@lojban.=
org</A> &nbsp; &nbsp;<A HREF=3D"http://www.lojban.org">www.lojban.org</A> <=
BR>
        President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. <BR>
        <BR>
        <BR>
    </BLOCKQUOTE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE>
    <BR>
    -- <BR>
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Grou=
ps &quot;lojban&quot; group.<BR>
    To view this discussion on the web visit <A HREF=3D"https://groups.goog=
le.com/d/msg/lojban/-/nz86kpRVGjUJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/=
-/nz86kpRVGjUJ</A>.<BR>
    To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<BR>
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@google=
groups.com.<BR>
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lo=
jban?hl=3Den.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<TABLE CELLSPACING=3D"0" CELLPADDING=3D"0" WIDTH=3D"100%">
<TR>
<TD>
<PRE>
--=20
Bob Slaughter, <A HREF=3D"mailto:rslauGUESS@WHATmindspring.com">rslauGUESS@=
WHATmindspring.com</A>
<A HREF=3D"http://www.facebook.com/robert.s.slaughter">http://www.facebook.=
com/robert.s.slaughter</A>&nbsp;
&quot;The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be
ruled by evil men.&quot; -- Plato
&quot;All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing.&quot; -- Edmund Burke
&quot;The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but
because of those who look on and do nothing.&quot; -- Albert Einstein
</PRE>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</BODY>
</HTML>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />



--=-w5RvSfXtUFYShykkS1QC--