Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu (uga.cc.uga.edu [128.192.1.5]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id CAA11773 for ; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 02:36:13 -0400 Message-Id: <199507200636.CAA11773@locke.ccil.org> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2248; Thu, 20 Jul 95 02:29:30 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3053; Thu, 20 Jul 1995 02:28:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 02:29:58 -0400 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: conceptually related gismu X-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Thu Jul 20 02:36:15 1995 X-From-Space-Address: <@uga.cc.uga.edu:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> I agree that thesaurus-like classifications are troublesome for Lojban. The concept was not desisgned for a predicate language, but for a "word" language. In general thhe classifications are thus based on the x1 of the predicate. It should be possible to extend the Roget-like work to all places of all predicates and you would come closer to an accurtae thesaurus of Lojban, but no one hhas ttackled this. I don;t think the thesaurus work is too strongly based on the English keyowrds so myuchh as it is on the x1-to-predicate relationship in whatever language, though of course Athelstan's early work was spotty in this because the keywords have been more stable than the poace structures for some words. lojbab