From sentto-44114-3315-962304175-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Thu Jun 29 18:41:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: shoulson-kli@meson.org Received: (qmail 5471 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 18:41:48 -0000 Received: from zash.lupine.org (205.186.156.18) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 18:41:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 17829 invoked by uid 40001); 29 Jun 2000 18:43:08 -0000 Delivered-To: kli-mark@kli.org Received: (qmail 17826 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 18:42:57 -0000 Received: from c9.egroups.com (207.138.41.187) by zash.lupine.org with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 18:42:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-3315-962304175-mark=kli.org@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.10.35] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Jun 2000 18:42:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 19647 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2000 18:42:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m1.onelist.org with QMQP; 29 Jun 2000 18:42:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-5.cais.net) (205.252.14.75) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Jun 2000 18:42:54 -0000 Received: from bob (dynamic110.cl7.cais.net [205.177.20.110]) by stmpy-5.cais.net (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e5TIgoL39877 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:42:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from lojbab@lojban.org) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000629143209.00b0ef00@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 To: lojban@egroups.com In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20000628210547.00aecce0@127.0.0.1> <20000629003956.79887.qmail@hotmail.com> From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@egroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:43:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [lojban] bacrynandu drata Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit At 02:21 PM 06/29/2000 -0400, Robert A. McIvor wrote: >At 21:20 -0400 28/6/00, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote: > >A major thing we wanted to avoid was having the same tanru being used to > >make several different words having different meanings. JCB and TLI took > >the approach that the dictionary-makers would choose one correct form to be > >used by all; I chose instead to say that all forms were valid and > >synonymous. > > The last sentence is misleading. JCB, while having a strong >preference for the shorter form, for the reason you cite always agreed that >all forms were valid and synonymous. That was certainly not made clear when we discussed the matter in 1986, though he may simply have not made clear what he felt. He did not always have a strong preference for the shortest form then, either, still feeling that the Zipfean correlation with frequency of concept (as shown in Eaton) should be respected, and also favoring parallel structures even if they did not always result in the shortest form. Most importantly, he was the one who talked of the "canonical form" that would be in the dictionary, and he gave me no impression that any other form would be considered acceptable once a word was assigned a canonical form by the dictionary editor/group. Perhaps he felt that multiple forms were acceptable before a canonical form were chosen, though he had at the time put a lot of emphasis on the lujvo-making algorithm scoring system. When we split off, and rejected in the process the concept of a "Loglan Academy" or any other standards board with the right to decide ad hoc canonical forms, it seemed like all-valid-and-synonymous was the only workable alternative. >The dictionary creates a canonical form, based on a point-rating system he >devised, but this can be (and is, occasionally) overridden for reasons of >euphony. In these cases, the dictionary program generates the algorithmic >form as well, with a 'See ....' reference to the overriding form. One >reason for >this is that dictionary users can enter the constituent predicates when >looking >for a (or proposing a new) word to determine the algorithmic form. This is somewhat similar to what I plan to do for the Lojban dictionary, but I plan to include the fully-expanded form, the shortest/best-scoring form, and any other forms that have seen high usage. The definition will be found under one of these (but not sure which) with the other two kinds of forms having a cross reference. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Never lose a file again. Protect yourself from accidental deletes, overwrites, and viruses with @Backup. Try @Backup it's easy, it's safe, and it's FREE! Click here to receive 300 MyPoints just for trying @Backup. http://click.egroups.com/1/5669/4/_/17627/_/962304175/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com