Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.213 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.213;
Subject: Re: [lojban] CLL help: add jbovlaste words
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
References: <u8Aq1q01F56Cr6M018Ar1F> <55ABE5E1.7040403@lojban.org>
 <20150817101638.GC22026@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
 <etPan.55d23be5.1aed748b.102db@seas1089.wireless-pennnet.upenn.edu>
 <61Yq1r00656Cr6M011Yrt1>
From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Message-ID: <55D3A4E4.9090507@lojban.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:34:28 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <61Yq1r00656Cr6M011Yrt1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

On 8/17/2015 9:32 PM, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 03:54:13PM -0400, Alex Burka wrote:
>> Done, assuming the answer is {lojbangirzu}. Feel free to quibble with my=
 definitions for {nakykemcinctu}.
>>
>>
>> On August 17, 2015 at 6:16:43 AM, Robin Lee Powell (rlpowell@digitalking=
dom.org) wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 02:01:05PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier, President
>> and Founder - LLG wrote:
>>>
>>> In the following, only one cmene and one lujvo in the first bunch
>>> are used (lojbangirz being the name-form that has been used the
>>> longest), and all of the second bunch are equivalent to the
>>> shortest one.
>>
>> What's the in-use lujvo form?
>>
>> Can someone make entries for nakykemcinctu , lojbangirz , ^^ and
>> whatever Bob's answer to that question is?

I just saw this, and Bob's answer is "I don't know".

I don't think I have ever actually used a lujvo form for this concept,=20
and I don't know what others have used.  The CLL text does, however, say=20
that the lowest algorithm score is for =E2=80=9Clojbaugri=E2=80=9D and barr=
ing any usage=20
history to the contrary, IMHO, the best scoring word should have a=20
dictionary entry, even if it only points to some word that is preferred=20
in usage.  Someone who knows the algorithm will try to look it up based=20
on the scoring.

Back when I was planning the dictionary, I actually wanted up to three=20
entries: the best scoring one (for someone who knows the algorithm, but=20
wants to check the definition/place structure), the fully-expanded form=20
"lojbybangygirzu" (for someone who doesn't know the rafsi) if it is=20
different, and any form that is preferred in usage to those two.

I understand that the current concept for jbovlaste would make it hard=20
to enforce creating all three entries (though I can imagine a software=20
approach that might be used to generate the algorithmic and fully=20
expanded forms with cross-reference pointers to the word-form which is=20
defined, if they do not already exist for a given word.  This might even=20
be a problem with the current jbovlaste, since I suspect that someone=20
currently could add a different form of a lujvo with a different=20
definition, and that error would not be detected.  (But that isn't a CLL=20
production issue).

lojbab

lojbab


--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.