Date:         Wed, 14 Oct 1998 23:51:45 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: vals,r,tesoroso
To:           Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Message-ID: <908423708.2114221.0@listserv.cuny.edu>
Content-Length: 1599
Lines: 31


>A thesaurus would help in learning vocubulary. The latest Lojban
>thesaurus I have found was written in 1991. It is incomplete,

Incomplete?  How so?  There are likely a few words missing, but hardly
enough to bother most people.  The numbering is according to a asystem that
Athelstan developed.  I amy be able to find something written on it.
The problem withg a thesaurus of Lojban is the place structures.  the
thesaurus classification done in 1989-91 was based primarily on the x1 place
and not on the gismyu itself.  You end up classifying words based on their
keyword, and not on their true meaning.  For example, all words that have
a "by stanndard" place should be in the same thesaurus group in Lojban
based on that place, evne though they are all manner of different concepts.
But from the standard point of view, they are all similar, and when you
subdivide by type of standard, you can get some fine gradations.  these will
likely be quite different from the English-based groupings.

In any event, I don't think that the old thesaurus is especially bad.  I
doubt that there is much that we would change if it were redone today.

I'll se if I can find info on how we did the thesaurus.  I know it was
mostl;y based on the original Roget.

lojbab