Received: from mail-vb0-f55.google.com ([209.85.212.55]:58620) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Tuy0N-0004jt-Tl; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:20:24 -0800 Received: by mail-vb0-f55.google.com with SMTP id ff20sf2944144vbb.20 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:20:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :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=+q03kpL8dB/JPDcjT3UiQhO4wJC2l9S5hard7WaW4Lw=; b=v/g76RIPUYAtboZoQyJ0uz7k1sfYQQsKec8hI3Ta6kQDh1dsbYBaO1VIvwXpUYXpJ6 w5PTDarjkebaIHPoOVl1dDu7KjUGnwpLPqs486+gg+zUHemHmiY15uLTu4TnGu1W5d9F 7LyvsWPiIEIEEfExxWqOQKlndhdAveAVOwYpUUP6ZE799BQzQaCcU9Yx3k73I9izVeum TT3k2gvjrAA9ZF3df1REQ2JAyCOapyW2J1UbpTw67+37Y5nG2OPFHHi8mLFTbZ3qCqQH 9jVfd7ZrLzXAjhuo2zw5cfiRKbzpU1u8sWsKcHbPUDhZ6sQGZiwNEJvslr+2wlfRB9pd +1ew== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:x-beenthere:x-received:date:from:to:message-id :in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :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=+q03kpL8dB/JPDcjT3UiQhO4wJC2l9S5hard7WaW4Lw=; b=GCi5GlhnmOzzzv1TUMnUyjsUw0qazwOSUD3mvS1aOs3wPtIZIgMFiwcEBWq1Wr0E/S 9eatk1W5Q8hFoeklTk9Q0+H96UNjpxqyDzbHTHS8m/36GyqIE55Zizzt84mkMRrl5ZnS NMpv1SsxQ0aiSQxvgYdzoZX6E1/D++b21VkF965URS1votJX6uSCH8DLoDQhz1q1VwFk 55L9T5Nnf0aDmD1pDAy3kSIXkpKEY0m234QuAXI9hvNb/qIBl37vhsjTlTTcDIewG/UC kMxJiyiWZVJx7ONI0R95xmZ+OPIaxJC/UnlBKDtMWOVTtgVpfUiIBp5J5aQvkVaGE2N8 Cb6A== X-Received: by 10.49.28.162 with SMTP id c2mr42464qeh.41.1358223601026; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:20:01 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.74.42 with SMTP id q10ls3945632qev.65.gmail; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:20:00 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.49.15.6 with SMTP id t6mr15473384qec.20.1358223600415; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:20:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:19:58 -0800 (PST) From: la gleki To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1358202481.2304.7.camel@thomas> References: <50F2D56C.8040405@lojban.org> <1704f503-32c7-48cf-9b68-4c438948385d@googlegroups.com> <1358202481.2304.7.camel@thomas> Subject: Re: [lojban] What is the source of gismu *definitions*? MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com 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: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1347_22992351.1358223598786" X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_1347_22992351.1358223598786 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:28:01 AM UTC+4, Bob Slaughter wrote: > > 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 > > As usual this topic is turning into a rant. But that was predictable and= =20 > unavoidable.=20 > > Reading lojbab's email, I find it a detailed and informative look at how= =20 > the gismu list was started and the initial gismu were formed, including= =20 > warts. If you consider this a "rant", > I consider the following messages as "rant". then it appears there really isn't much need for me to read any more emails= =20 > from you. I would be willing to consider otherwise, if you can demonstrat= e=20 > useful work you have contributed. The "lojban berries" is almost the most= =20 > useless thing I can think of -- *of course* "ckule" looks and sounds like= =20 > "school" -- it was derived from "school / schule" and the other words fro= m=20 > the target languages for *maximum phonetic recognition*.=20 > This is only one tab of Lojban berries. Look at the other tabs.=20 On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:40:28 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote: > > la gleki wrote:=20 > > Every Lojbanist understands that gismu denote predicates that are highl= y=20 > > practical.=20 > > e.g. {pilno} includes a goal as pilno3. Indeed, how can we imagine usin= g=20 > > something without a goal?=20 > >=20 > > My question is who collected those definitions?=20 > > Me.=20 > > > Was it JCB?=20 > > > How was this gimste formed?=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 > > 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 > > 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 > > 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 > > I strongly avoided one-place predicates.=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 > > Is there a changelog of modifications to gismu=20 > > definitions starting from the first edition of loglan?=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 > > > 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 > > 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 > > 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 > > > Were Mandarin predicates taken into consideration while constructing=20 > > gismu definitions?=20 > > Not that I know of. I did the Mandarin work for Lojban, and I don't=20 > know Mandarin.=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 > > > > 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 > > 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 > > (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 > > 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 > > lojbab=20 > --=20 > Bob LeChevalier loj...@lojban.org www.lojban.org=20 > President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.=20 > > > =20 > --=20 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= =20 > "lojban" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit=20 > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/nz86kpRVGjUJ. > To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to=20 > lojban+un...@googlegroups.com . > For more options, visit this group at=20 > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. > > > --=20 > Bob Slaughter, rslau...@WHATmindspring.com http://www.facebo= ok.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 --=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/lo= jban/-/XjZ68ZouJf4J. 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. ------=_Part_1347_22992351.1358223598786 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 2:28:01 AM UTC+4, Bob Slaughter wrote:=
=20 =20
On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 06:50 -0800, la gleki wrote:
doi lojbab mi ckire do .io lo ka ciksi so'a da


As usual this topic is turning into a rant. But that was predictable an= d unavoidable.
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 "rant",

I co= nsider the following messages as "rant".

then it appears there really isn't muc= h need for me to read any more emails from you. I would be willing to consi= der otherwise, if you can demonstrate useful work you have contributed. The= "lojban berries" is almost the most useless thing I can think of -- *of co= urse* "ckule" looks and sounds like "school" -- it was derived from "school= / schule" and the other words from the target languages for *maximum phone= tic recognition*.

This is only o= ne tab of Lojban berries. Look at the other tabs. 

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 7:40:28 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:
la gleki wrote:
> Every Lojbanist understands that gismu denote predicates that = are highly
> practical.
> e.g. {pilno} includes a goal as pilno3. Indeed, how can we ima= gine using
> something without a goal?
>
> My question is who collected those definitions?

Me.

> Was it JCB?

 > How was this gimste formed?

JCB set the place structures for the TLI Loglan words.  His ge= neral
philosophy of doing so was set forth in his books Loglan 1 and Logl= an 2,
though he didn't always follow his own principles.

I started with JCB's list, but greatly modified it, both adding and=
deleting words.  As such, there are half-again as many gismu a= s there
were in TLI Loglan of the time.  In very few cases can I tell = you for
certain the specific reason I added certain words, though for the <= br> culture words I made an attempt to be systematic.  A large chu= nk was
added in 1988 as a result of Athelstan doing a thorough analysis ba= sed
on Roget's thesaurus, to make sure that we had good coverage of all=
semantic domains.

During the period from about 1990-1994, I subjected all change prop= osals
to the LogFest attendees, representing the community, for approval.=  In
the latter two years, a faction emerged favoring the elimination of= some
gismu and thus keeping the total number constant, in the face of ne= w
proposals, if not shrinking.  One last group of new ones was a= pproved,
and the list was frozen.  Many years passed before any word wa= s proposed
with significant justification, thus suggesting that this decision = was
correct.  (If no one has really needed a word in 25 odd years = of use, it
is hard to argue that it is fundamental, even if it might be useful= .)

Place structures started with JCB's general pattern.  I attemp= ted to
find patterns, and then to make words of similar semantic domain consistent.  Thus all plant and animal gismu were to have a sp= ecies
place.  I eventually got things fairly systematic, though I ma= de some
mistakes.  At that point, pretty much no one besides me was lo= oking that
closely.

I strongly avoided one-place predicates.

But at one point, I realized I was going too far, ascribing to any =
possible tool a purpose, and to any object both material and form <= br> places.  I backed off from this somewhat.  I thus avoided= >5 place
predicates.  At about this point, the current concept of BAI s= tarted to
emerge, and it was realized that a large number of places were
superfluous.  I made one last pass, generally reducing many of= the
excess places I had added.

Is there a changelog of modifications to gismu
> definitions starting from the first edition of loglan?

Not hardly.  I introduced the concept of configuration managem= ent in the
1988-1994 period, starting to document all changes once a chunk of = the
language was baselined.  Before it was baselined, documentatio= n was
rarely attempted, though there are some cases.  In only a few = cases do
we even have good copies of the evolving word lists - this was stil= l a
primarily paper and pencil project.

> My particular interest here is with the recent discussion of a= possible
> new gismu meaning "qua". The corresponding word is of high fre= quency in
> Mandarin but in European languages it is often confused with w= ords
> meaning {simsa}.
> e.g.
> "as" means both "like" and "qua".
> Russian "=D0=BA=D0=B0=D0=BA" [kak] means both "like" and "qua"= .

I have no comment on the merits of this, other than to merely obser= ve
that many of the world's languages seem to do fine without making a=
distinction.

The gismu list is baselined.  New gismu are not being consider= ed, and
there is no plan to do so in the future, though this could be revis= ited
AFTER the existing language is fully documented.

> Were Mandarin predicates taken into consideration while constr= ucting
> gismu definitions?

Not that I know of.  I did the Mandarin work for Lojban, and I= don't
know Mandarin.

More importantly, almost no consideration of semantics was involved= in
gismu-making.  If the basic meaning was generally covered, tha= t was good
enough.  It was expected that the meanings and place structure= s would
evolve with usage.  (But by 1997, the community was tired of m= y and
other senior Lojbanists changing the language by fiat.  The co= mmunity
wanted the language to stop changing in that matter.  Complete= ly.  I
agreed with them.  We don't change the language by fiat anymor= e.  The
only exception, adopted for byfy use, is that stuff which is so bro= ken
as to prevent good documentation of the status quo language, could = be
changed so as to allow that documentation.  (Since then, senti= ment seems
to have grown against "usage-based change" which is the other
alternative, and one that cannot really be prevented.  People = generally
are biased against change in language.  They want books that a= re
prescriptive and unchanging, whereas lexicographers strongly consid= er
dictionaries by nature to be descriptive rather than prescriptive.)=



I did use some systematic techniques to try to be sure I was pickin= g the
correct root, and for a brief time, we had a native Mandarin speake= r who
looked over what I had done with approval. (A couple of Mandarin speakers since then have also said that the work I did was more tha= n
adequate, but they were generally comparing us to Esperanto and oth= er
Euroclone languages). I also used 3 different dictionaries in the c= ase
of Mandarin in order to be more certain, since Mandarin has such a = high
weight in Lojban word-making.  Still, there are flaws, and I t= hink my
choice for Lojbanization of Mandarin was especially bad, being base= d
solely on the quasi-official Chinese description of the IPA
pronunciation of Chinese particles, and the system I used for mappi= ng
IPA in other languages.  As a result, Mandarin inputs had too = many "a"s
representing schwa, and too many fricatives were mapped to s and c,=
leading to Lojban having a "she sells sea shells" quality that is h= ard
for some speakers, including me, to speak the language quickly and =
accurately.

But I don't know enough Mandarin grammar to have any clue what subj= ects
and objects any given Mandarin word might require (if any)  I = did enough
comparative linguistics study to be reasonably confident that my approach was "good enough".

(Arabic is the other language where my word-making rules were syste= matic
but led to a relatively poor result.  And since Arabic has the= lowest
weight of the 6 source languages, this meant that Arabic influenced=
relative few words, and its inputs were less useful to Arabic speak= ing
Lojbanists.

JCB may have had some native speaker inputs in the early days, but = my
general observations on his choices for word-making suggest that th= ey
were even more limited and flawed than my efforts.  I know tha= t we had
much better dictionaries by 1987 than JCB had in 1955.

lojbab
--
Bob LeChevalier    loj...@lojban.org    = www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Grou= ps "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 loj...@googlegroups.com.=
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@g= ooglegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/gr= oup/lojban?hl=3Den.

--=20
Bob Slaughter, rslau...@WHATmindspring.com
ht=
tp://www.facebook.com/robert.s.slaughter 
"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

--
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/-/Xj= Z68ZouJf4J.
=20 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.
------=_Part_1347_22992351.1358223598786--