[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bpfk] lololol whole section missing?
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Robin Lee Powell
<rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:
> In case the implicit question wasn't obvious: Should I put this
> back in? Same with the other one.
I think the list of conflicting consonants should be there, since it's
an important part of the gismu creation algorithm.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
>
> -Robin
>
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 08:29:20AM -0800, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
>> Not sure how I missed this on the last run, but the Red Book has:
>>
>> - --------------------------
>>
>> <dt>4) <dd>Any gismu forms that conflicted with existing gismu were removed. Obviously, being identical with an existing gismu cons
>> titutes a conflict. In addition, a proposed gismu that was identical to an existing gismu except for the final vowel was considered
>> a conflict, since two such gismu would have identical 4-letter rafsi.
>> </dl>
>> <dl compact><p><p><cx "gismu, too-similar"> XE "gismu: too-similar" <cx "gismu: creation, proscribed gismu pairs"> XE "gismu: cr
>> eation, proscribed gismu pairs"
>> <dt><dd>More subtly: If the proposed gismu was identical to an existing gismu except for a single consonant, and the consonant was "
>> too similar” based on the following table, then the proposed gismu was rejected.
>> <p><p>
>> <dt> <dd>proposed gismu existing gismu
>> <p><p>
>> <dt> <dd>b p, v
>> c j, s
>> d t
>> f p, v
>> g k, x
>> j c, z
>> k g, x
>> l r
>> m n
>> n m
>> p b, f
>> r l
>> s c, z
>> t d
>> v b, f
>> x g, k
>> z j, s
>> </dl>
>> <p><p> See <a href=#s4>Section 4 </a>for an example.
>> <p>
>> <dl compact><p>
>> <cx "gismu creation, and transcription blunders"> XE "gismu: creation, and transcription blunders"
>> <dt>5) <dd>The gismu form with the highest score usually became the actual gismu. Sometimes a lower-scoring form was used to provid
>> e a better rafsi. A few gismu were changed in error as a result of transcription blunders (for example, the gismu "gismu” should hav
>> e been "gicmu”, but it's too late to fix it now).
>> </dl>
>> <p><cx "gismu, source-language weights for"> XE "gismu: source-language weights for" The language weights used to make most of th
>> e gismu were as follows:
>> <p>
>> <pre> Chinese 0.36
>> English 0.21
>> Hindi 0.16
>> Spanish 0.11
>> Russian 0.09
>> Arabic 0.07
>> </pre>reflecting 1985 number-of-speakers data. A few gismu were made much later <dl compact><p>
>> <dt>using updated weights: <dd>
>> <p><p>
>> <dt> <dd>Chinese 0.347
>> Hindi 0.196
>> English 0.160
>> Spanish 0.123
>> Russian 0.089
>> Arabic 0.085
>> </dl>
>> <p>(English and Hindi switched places due to demographic changes.)
>> <p>
>> Note that the stressed vowel of the gismu was considered sufficiently distinctive that two or more gismu may differ only in this vowel; as an extreme example, "bradi”, "bredi”, "bridi”, and "brodi” (but fortunately not "brudi”) are all existing gismu.
>>
>> - --------------------------
>>
>> Now, dag-cll in the same place:
>>
>> <para>Any gismu forms that conflicted with existing gismu were removed. Obviously, being identical with an existing gismu constitutes a conflict. In addition, a proposed gismu that was identical to an existing gismu except for the final vowel was considered a conflict, since two such gismu would have identical 4-letter rafsi.</para>
>> </listitem>
>> </varlistentry>
>> <varlistentry>
>> <term>5)</term>
>> <listitem>
>> <para>The gismu form with the highest score usually became the actual gismu. Sometimes a lower-scoring form was used to provide a better rafsi. A few gismu were changed in error as a result of transcription blunders (for example, the gismu
>> <quote>gismu</quote> should have been
>> <quote>gicmu</quote>, but it's too late to fix it now).</para>
>> </listitem>
>> </varlistentry>
>> </variablelist>
>> <para>Note that the stressed vowel of the gismu was considered sufficiently distinctive that two or more gismu may differ only in this vowel; as an extreme example,
>>
>> - --------------------------
>>
>> You'll notice that this is just a teensy-weensy difference, and that
>> dag-cll is Rather Shorter.
>>
>> What do I do with this?
>>
>> -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 "BPFK" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> 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 "BPFK" group.
> To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.