From sentto-44114-19913-1053961801-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon May 26 08:10:49 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 26 May 2003 08:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.65]) by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19KJcO-0000qu-00 for lojban-in@lojban.org; Mon, 26 May 2003 08:10:32 -0700 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-19913-1053961801-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 May 2003 15:10:01 -0000 X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 25410 invoked from network); 26 May 2003 15:09:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 May 2003 15:09:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakemtao03.cox.net) (68.1.17.242) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 May 2003 15:09:10 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org ([68.100.92.1]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030526150909.XRPL23518.lakemtao03.cox.net@bob.lojban.org> for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 11:09:09 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030526104951.0337a4e0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com In-Reply-To: <794CAC48-8F81-11D7-AC97-003065D4EC72@optushome.com.au> From: Robert LeChevalier X-Yahoo-Profile: lojbab MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 11:08:36 -0400 Subject: [lojban] Re: emotions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 5411 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list At 11:53 PM 5/26/03 +1000, Nick Nicholas wrote: >To And's puzzlement, all I have to respond with is: gismu are a closed >class. ... [Agreed with Nick's response] >And with all respect to jbovlaste, I don't see anyone expecting that >the entirety of its contents will ever constitute a baseline >(especially if it is to be issued in the next three years). It is not that it will constitute a baseline, but rather that it will be USED as the reference standard for the language "because it is there". (As you noted, the official dictionary is not there - even though it isn't "vaporware", but merely draft - but then so is jbovlaste.) Thus I note that jbofi'e seems to have displaced the official parser, and the E-BNF which was the unofficial grammar standard displaced the YACC in usage to the point that it was added to CLL and hence made part of the baseline, and now people find "errors" in the language based on jbofi'e and the E-BNF. Because users can freely add to it WITHOUT any vetting on their additions, people will add to jbovlaste. And because it is readily available for word lookup, those who live on the net will USE jbovlaste. Thus it stands to overwhelm any and all baseline standards by its mere existence, if it permits non-baseline-standard entry/display on equal terms with baseline-standard work. I don't see any easy solution - I realize the amount of work that went into jbovlaste, and the apparent fact that people like it a lot better than they liked editing "noralujv" and the draft dictionary files (which I admit we never provided a good editing/commenting mechanism for). (And I realize your criticism that I should be adding standard words to compete with the nonstandard ones. But people want me to serve my last time as President productively, and you also want me to respond to supplication on byfy and maybe do more besides, so official obligations have taken precedent over word building, even though I admit the latter is more fun for me than the other stuff). >Gismu and >camvo are baselined. I really don't see the point in a large set of >lujvo or fu'ivla being in a baseline. In a reference dictionary, sure. Which jbovlaste, unedited, will be. >But I don't set on such a dictionary the canonical value I place on the >fundamental building blocks of the language. As canon, I agree. But I look at what the community USES, and they are USING jbovlaste. >(This counters Bob's vision of the dictionary. Not sure what you think my vision is. But your vision as presented is not that unlike mine. I just recognize what the user-community and the world think about dictionaries supersedes what the linguists think about them. > But then, Bob has his vision, and I have mine. And I continue to think > his vision naive.) My argument on this issue is based on the fact that I KNOW my ideal for the dictionary is naive when jbovlaste is a reality. And I don't have time (or web-programming knowhow) to come up with my own alternative, so I am stuck with complaining, and hoping I can stimulate others into acting as needed. 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 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/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/