From arj@nvg.org Sun May 09 12:45:18 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 09 May 2004 12:45:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67] ident=[3avBGnfR6OB3+sfRu1K/Gd/X7zLijqaQ]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.31) id 1BMuEY-0004dx-9m for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 09 May 2004 12:45:11 -0700 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no ([IPv6:::ffff:129.241.210.68]:45753 "EHLO hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]" whoson: "-unregistered-") by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable; Sun, 9 May 2004 21:39:03 +0200 Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 21:44:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: jbovlaste lujvo definitions -- opinions wanted. In-Reply-To: <20040509174041.GJ5570@digitalkingdom.org> Message-ID: References: <20040509174041.GJ5570@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-archive-position: 7728 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, 9 May 2004, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > In http://www.lojban.org/jbovlaste/help/definitions.html > I tell people to write definitions like > > d_1=b_1 bitches/whines/expresses anguish about d_2 with > utterance/sound(s) b_2 > > rather than > > x_2=d_1=b_1 bitches/whines/expresses anguish about x_2=d_2 with > utterance/sound(s) x_3=b_2 > > I have since decided that the latter is more readable, because it lets > the reader know at a glance how many places there are, and which place > is where, without having to count them. I definitely prefer the former in most cases, because of aesthetics (which translates to ease of reading). In cases where the places are not mentioned in the same order in the natlang explanation as the real order of the places, x_1= etc. is in order (no pun intended). > Before changing the help and asking people to change their definitions, > I'd like to see what people on the list think. Do you prefer one over > the other? If you prefer the second form, should "x_1" always be used, > or the first letter of the lujvo, or a series of letters representing > the lujvo ("bd_1" in the case of ba'urdu'u) ? I think the reason we use free-text definitions at all (as opposed to merely a mapping between lujvo and gismu places) is to minimize the difference between lujvo and gismu. According to this spirit, we should keep the index letter as x. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Jeg er nok verdens sydligste sengevæter. Forutsatt at ingen på basen på Sydpolen driver med slikt, da. --Erling Kagge: Alene til Sydpolen