From lojban-out@lojban.org Fri Apr 08 18:26:23 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 68266 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2005 01:26:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Apr 2005 01:26:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2005 01:26:21 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DK4jt-0001rf-G4 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:26:21 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DK4jG-0001r1-0v; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:25:44 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DK4j4-0001qs-Hn for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:25:30 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.197]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DK4j2-0001qI-Aq for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:25:30 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so1107724wri for ; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:24:57 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=EUyr0dN55Ie6AbEwH+dGZBioXRVP3e9cJTSF8KjJoJOm8CQOj6DkvW8WhY0GkKmkkQObEXpq4Xr1he5to32ZIzrwa6mMOzH4kcHfN71pw2MHDIeMbHKrgB4rhSvmtVdc2mpxqN7eeR/0Dr5kP4Vr4nXof5l8Mh2Y0RPLgBLWWYo= Received: by 10.54.40.34 with SMTP id n34mr105000wrn; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 18:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.69.3 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 18:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d175605040818246a0bb9e1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:24:57 -0300 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 9802 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 X-eGroups-From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= Reply-To: jjllambias@gmail.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Semantics of lojban and glibau, and Lojban FrameNet revisited X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24158 On Apr 8, 2005 7:24 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > Taking this kind of approach to defining argument structures would seem to > reduce the risk of odd inconsistencies occurring in the dictionary of > argument-structures... I'm curious why a systematic approach like this > wasn't taken in constructing the Lojban dictionary, since Lojbanoidic folks > seem so interested in order and systematicity... it's odd that the > argument-structures are only imperfectly and informally systematized, no? In the particular case of culture words, their place structures are fortunately very systematic. It's always: "x1 reflects XXXXX culture/nationality/language/... in aspect x2". I don't think there are any exceptions. {lojbo} has the same structure as {glico} and so presumably lujvo made with them will also have parallel structures. You just happened to pick a cmevla for Lojban and a lujvo for English, but you could have used cmevla for both or lujvo for both if you wanted to. But the point is valid in general: gismu place structures have some truly odd inconsistencies that are hard to explain, so instead of learning some tens of patterns of place structures we have to learn hundreds. Just as an example: words for living things have the very regular place structure "x1 is a XXXX of breed/race/species/variety/strain/cultivar/type x2". But there are a few inexplicable exceptions that have to be learned separately. mu'o mi'e xorxes