From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Jan 03 14:15:47 2008 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Received: (qmail 31641 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2008 22:15:46 -0000 X-Received: from unknown (66.218.67.97) by m52.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2008 22:15:46 -0000 X-Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.3) by mta18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2008 22:15:46 -0000 X-Received: (qmail 16197 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2008 22:15:45 -0000 X-Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail1.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 3 Jan 2008 22:15:45 -0000 X-Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JAYLl-0004qt-RG for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:15:44 -0800 X-Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JAYKt-0004lz-Hg; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:14:53 -0800 X-Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:12:31 -0800 (PST) X-Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JAYIg-0004lr-Vl for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:12:31 -0800 X-Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JAYIc-0004le-3b for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:12:30 -0800 X-Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so3094628fga.0 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:12:24 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.86.28.5 with SMTP id b5mr7331295fgb.76.1199398344515; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:12:24 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.86.1.11 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:12:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560801031412o5d1abb08q5626d980cdef5994@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 19:12:24 -0300 In-Reply-To: <477D4CB5.5060802@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <702226df0801021635h1e3f1cd1q8e9f848ae1e2a427@mail.gmail.com> <477C38E2.80400@lojban.org> <925d17560801030633s1650f796j741ad63f1f96b4bf@mail.gmail.com> <477CFF5D.8000808@lojban.org> <925d17560801030747x698937aew7be717452b4c808a@mail.gmail.com> <477D4CB5.5060802@lojban.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 14074 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 69.17.117.3 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0:0 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: Lojban-English full dictionary effort- request for assistance X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=IwXOdplxbvB1TeGpNpp6OeL1tH9tBYLuwi-xpHKqICB5gmMiuw X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 28555 On Jan 3, 2008 5:59 PM, Bob LeChevalier wrote: > Jorge Llambías wrote: > > > > For this question, only the x1 place is relevant. > > If there is no x2 place defined for xxxyyy then the selkemxxxyyy lujvo > has no obvious meaning. Right, but is that the question we were discussing? To answer the question "will selxxxyyy be more likely understood as sel(xxxyyy) or as (selxxx)yyy?" you only need to know what the x1 of selxxxyyy is. All lujvo I looked at in jbovlaste of form selxxxyyy are clearly intended as (selxxx)yyy, because their x1 corresponds to the x1 of xxxxx, not to the x2 of xxxxx. > If mere tens have been > used to make meaningfully multi-placed lujvo, that is a couple of > percent. Now we are trying to conclude how many of those lujvo will be > used in meaningful compounds, and I see no reason why we would expect > more than a couple of percent. A couple of percent of "tens" could > easily be less than 1. Tens are the lujvo of form selxxxyyy, not those of form xxxyyy. There must be hundreds of two rafsi lujvo. And among those tens, not one that I could find is meant as sel(xxxyyy), they are all (selxxx)yyy. > Meanwhile, I just looked in one of my old lujvo files, I think Nick's > analyzed file: > selkemspadji > terkemselgeimau > are both in there with defined place structures. Yes, those are two of the three with sel/ter/vel/xel-kem- that I mentioned that are in jbovlaste.The third is {velkemprema'e}. > I have no idea if these words ever saw usage or made it into jbovlaste. Probably no usage, but I think all the lujvo from that list are in jbovlaste, if they were in noralujv. > Thus selkemxismalsi is English "parish" > and terkemxismalsi is English "denomination". Right. You need -kem-, otherwise they would most likely be interpreted as some kind of temple. > These lujvo will not exist until a) people want to talk about the > subject matter, b) a place structure for the simpler term is settled, c) > people are sufficiently confident about their lujvo making competence to > bother making lujvo And that's assuming people ever want to use 4-rafsi lujvo. I think it's much more likely that {se xismalsi}, {te xismalsi} will be preferred. mu'o mi'e xorxes To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.