To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMAEJGGHAA.a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <LPBBLNNHBOGBGAINBIEFMEDKCKAA.raganok@intrex.net>
Importance: Normal
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 13:22:21 +0100
Subject: RE: [lojban] dictionary - which words?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
Content-Length: 2968
Lines: 67

Craig:
> >> >I would not expect to find either "se mau" nor "semau" as an entry
> >> >in a dictionary that lists words.
> >>
> >> Existing dictionaries do not list words, they list *lexemes*. I would
> argue
> >> that although semau is most certainly not a word, it equally certainly is
> a
> >> lexeme. It therefore ought to be in the dictionary.
> >>
> >> >>Further, it seems like a poor idea to try and use the dictionary to
> >> >>correct a failing of the pedagogical process. Teach people how words
> >> >>break apart properly, and this is a nonconcern.
> >>
> >> >Exactly. Then when you want to know what "semau" means you search
> >> >under "mau" (or under "se" if that is the part you don't know).
> >>
> >> The problem, however, is that semau is one lexeme composed of two words,
> and
> >> we might want to look up that lexeme. If I know se and mau, but I do not
> >> know zmadu, then knowing that semau is se+mau does not tell me what it
> >> *means*.
> 
> >I think you're wrong and that "semau" is not a single lexeme. But
> >you say that you would argue that it certainly is a lexeme. On what
> >basis would you argue that?
> 
> "ko'a broda mau ko'e":          ko'a brodas, exceeded by ko'e.
> "ko'a broda semau ko'e":        ko'a brodas, exceeding ko'e.
> 
> "ko'a broda ta'i lenu brode":   ko'a brodas by brodeing
> "ko'a broda seta'i lenu brode": ko'a brodas as a method for brodeing.
> 
> The relationship between mau and semau is only the same as the relationship
> between ta'i and seta'i to one who knows the places of zmadu and tadji. If
> you don't know tadji, then you can't get the meaning of seta'i from the
> meanings of se and ta'i.
> 
> I don't know whether I think semau should go between "sema'i" and "semaunai"
> as it does in the ma'oste, or whether it should instead be under the "mau"
> heading, between "mau" and "temau", but there should be a listing for it.

Okay, it's a reasonable argument, but as postings from Greg & Jorge
point out, "(se) mau" is supposed to be equivalent to "fi'o (se)
zmadu", so the semantics of "se mau" is compositionally derived
from the semantics of se, zmadu and selmaho BAI.

There is a utilitarian case for listing "se mau" under headword MAU
-- to ease the life of dictionary users who don't know the mau =
fi'o zmadu equivalence, or who can't be bothered to go look up the
place structure of zmadu, but it is important that "semau" not be
a headword in its own right.

--And.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Looking for a more powerful website? Try GeoCities for $8.95 per month.
Register your domain name (http://your-name.com). More storage! No ads!
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info
http://us.click.yahoo.com/aHOo4D/KJoEAA/MVfIAA/GSaulB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/