From lojban+bncCK30vq5WEKvEsOQEGgRA5Y-m@googlegroups.com Sat Sep 11 17:43:37 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OuafN-0006RB-O6; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:37 -0700 Received: by pwj6 with SMTP id 6sf240815pwj.16 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:date:from:to:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-disposition; bh=L+CsUjp8XefmV4+mHHIGSyMRcNX9zBQkrDfEFQaQeGo=; b=hOGy6fbS0q8FFeJPo05fzGIC0bPJQfIrscat1he4SFhWA8q14WdxRXdif7pBVMeQeQ bQuZQWCHg9/imSqklJo6HB8b94hvwcnI1XQGCP8iEHzFOS0QdsSvV0e1uNspaTnmcrzq ApX9cOYYKjVRfVWCvfA5fEwou+qS5fjND0+MA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:user-agent:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-disposition; b=BJI7AYbibdS5+PmWxO4zv5BpYjN90loxnD1Lk5S8LDPA0w4+Dp20mJHqts8whGMxuP EVGNzyOQKR5xcby2tnplQnFSMLxYa8x/A5ZPtc7DvwBBEnC3tMqID+2uw9Jd3ivrHBG+ CRqtq/WYGdjMSqQ3JhOt2UqUYCvMRzvPFl/nU= Received: by 10.142.121.40 with SMTP id t40mr79146wfc.30.1284252203481; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.117.2 with SMTP id p2ls5146524wfc.1.p; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.208.21 with SMTP id f21mr629416wfg.30.1284252202653; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.208.21 with SMTP id f21mr629414wfg.30.1284252202630; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org (chain.digitalkingdom.org [64.81.66.169]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id t33si5284381wfc.4.2010.09.11.17.43.22; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 64.81.66.169 as permitted sender) client-ip=64.81.66.169; Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OuafB-0006R0-96 for lojban@googlegroups.com; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:21 -0700 Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:43:21 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [bpfk] Technical, Help Request: What information *should* a Lojban dictionary system have? Message-ID: <20100912004321.GL13937@digitalkingdom.org> References: <20100911215035.GG13937@digitalkingdom.org> <4C8C1DAD.1020709@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4C8C1DAD.1020709@lojban.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Original-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org designates 64.81.66.169 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 08:24:13PM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > Robin Lee Powell wrote: > >Much more interesting to me is the back-end data: What sorts of > >things *should* a Lojbanic dictionary store, ideally? > > > >What got this started is the realization that Lojban isn't > >English, and that, in particular, the brivla definitions seem > >anti-Lojbanic. When I see > > > > x1 gets/procures/acquires/obtains/accepts x2 from source x3 > > > >that kind of looks to me like a verb; I see the big thing in the > >middle as being "the meaning" of "the verb". > > > >Lojban isn't like that: brivla are as much or more about the > >*places* than about the central meaning-concept. > > > >This lead to me wondering what a definition format that really > >focused on the places would look like; I don't really have an > >answer yet, but this in turn lead to a lot of other stuff. > > A lot of thought, as well as research on dictionary writing went > into the format I used, which is what appears above. The decisive > factor that led to the above was brevity (which is a factor in > most dictionaries that see print) I'll respond to the rest later, but just to be clear: I have no particular aversion to that format as such *for a print dictionary*. My issue is with storing the definitions that way internally to the database. I was speculating on the nature of that format, it's true, but not with any serious intent; just noodling. -Robin -- http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future. Lojban (http://www.lojban.org/): The language in which "this parrot is dead" is "ti poi spitaki cu morsi", but "this sentence is false" is "na nei". My personal page: http://www.digitalkingdom.org/rlp/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.