From adam@pubcrawler.org Mon Oct 13 14:58:36 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:58:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postal.seas.wustl.edu ([128.252.145.2]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22) id 1A9Ahw-00070I-Q7 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:58:28 -0700 Received: from clarion.cec.wustl.edu (clarion.cec.wustl.edu [128.252.21.3]) by postal.seas.wustl.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9DLwMR23256 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:58:22 -0500 Received: from localhost (adam@localhost) by clarion.cec.wustl.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h9DLwFtt017628 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:58:15 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: clarion.cec.wustl.edu: adam owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:58:15 -0500 (CDT) From: "Adam D. Lopresto" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: larger brodV - what do you think In-Reply-To: <3F8B0F8D.4050506@udm.ru> Message-ID: References: <3F8B0F8D.4050506@udm.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Status: No, -7.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Report: -7.1/5.0 ---- Start SpamAssassin results -7.10 points, 5 required; * -0.0 -- Has a valid-looking References header * 0.0 -- Message-Id indicates a non-spam MUA (Pine) * -0.4 -- Has a In-Reply-To header * -0.4 -- Has a X-Authentication-Warning header * -0.5 -- BODY: Contains what looks like an email attribution * -5.4 -- BODY: Bayesian classifier says spam probability is 1 to 10% [score: 0.0145] * -0.4 -- BODY: Contains what looks like a quoted email text * 0.0 -- Reply with quoted text ---- End of SpamAssassin results X-archive-position: 6431 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: adam@pubcrawler.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Well, there's za'e. Too bad za'e doesn't have a rafsi; it would be pretty handy for that. (Actually, za'e doesn't seem to be assigned as a rafsi to anything.) Or you could go the type 3 fu'ivla route, and prefix your words with brodr-, which would pretty well mark them as nonportable, while giving you a large space of legal words. And as far as I can tell, it would be perfectly baseline compliant, and pretty easily understandable. On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Oleg Leschov wrote: > Sometimes in engeneering practice (especially in software engineering), > when designing some complex abstract system, there is a need to > introduce new terms that would have concrete meaning in this system and > are needed to be referenced frequently. I might preciecely define their > semantical meaning using some common terms, or other specific terms like > that. These terms may also be called "semantical macros", perhaps. So > the point is, that it would be beneficial to give them some shorter and > more sounding ids than "the thing described here and there", perhaps a > whole new word or phrase, and to use it in any further work on the same > subject. > > Of cause, I could just introduce a new terminology, but that might > contradict (collide) with some already existing one, and so I would have > to care for unambiguity in the text. > > So the idea is to create some entirely new and comparably short words > for things I need, and maybe even later morph them by the lojban > compound words creation rules. However, the words created for specific > documents need not to be able to be found in all-time official lojban > dictionary some day - they should have their meaning then and only then > when the context somehow contains the document or a system that they > were defined in (for). > > This means that they are a kind of "variables" (brodV and others) that > lojban already has. Unlike these, however, the terms should be more > sounding, and it should be possible to combine them by the rules of > lojban morphology. Also, their possible meaning should not be limited to > 1-place brivla - predicate of any valid number of places should be > definable (using some general kind of description, perhaps). > > So I could just take any lojbanly-legal word as gismu for my new term > and use that. But of cause this approach I do not like, for in the > future, this particular gismu or their combination might acquire some > completely different meaning. > > So what would I like to have is large enough "name space" the words from > which could be used to represent local terminology, and which maybe > could also be used generally, in case if speaker prefers them to things > like "broda, by, my, ny" and the like. > > Any thoughts? Are there any possible yet unused namespaces that could be > forever assigned the special meaning - no meaning outside of any valid > context, not breaking existing lojban syntax? > > By namespaces I mean things like CCVCV + CVCCV - they are now gismu with > universal meaning... Another example is existing brodV - this looks like > a namespace I am talking about, but it is somewhat small for this task. > There should be at least a couple of hundreds of words in it IMHO, that > should be vocally broad (I mean, using all lojban sounds) so that the > text that relies on them alot would look and sound nice. > > Note that I am myself not too competent in lojban yet because I've > discovered it on the net somewhat recently (and hence I didn't propose > any specific solution yet). So I think this language has quite a > potential for technical and abstract definitions, and thus it could > benefit from such a linguistic device. > > > > -- Adam Lopresto http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/ Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? [ OK ]