[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[jbovlaste] Re: drunk

Not a stupid question at all, Yanis. The fact that we appear to be simply discarding an old dictionary and doing all the work all over again, is a situation that demands an explanation. I suppose we have been relying to much on unwritten tribal knowledge in the process, which makes things difficult for enthusiastic new volunteers like you.

On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, Yanis Batura wrote:

On 06.07.2006, 20:37, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote:

Noralujv.txt has recorded at least three suggestions for this.

Isn't NORALUJV.txt present in jbovlaste??

Yes and no. All entries have been imported into Jbovlaste, but have by default no votes. Hence, they don't appear as search results.

It is possible to vote specific definitions into becoming live, but in most cases this is not recommended. This is because the definitions have all been automatically generated from the place structure codes in noralujv.txt, and are for the most part difficult or impossible to understand, or simply wrong.


There are many reasons. Most can be boiled down to the fact that noralujv.txt simply isn't good enough. Noralujv is a fairly comprehensive catalogue of early usage, but it was never intended as an official dictionary in itself, merely as an aid in creating one. Also, it has not been updated for at least five years.

Also some of the lujvo *themselves* are very obviously bad coinings, and should therefore not be used. Since Jbovlaste aspires to be the authoritative source of Correct Lojban Words(tm), we can and should exclude those words that are not good enough.

The final reason we can't use noralujv.txt directly, is the format of the place structure definitions. They consist of mere pointers to gismu places. When the work with Jbovlaste started, it was decided that this format is simply too terse. It makes lujvo definitions stand out too much from gismu definitions, making lujvo seem to be compositionally derived from the source gismu -- which is wrong. Also, oblique places often have a slightly different meaning than that of the corresponding place in the source gismu, which needs to be recorded in the definition.

Arnt Richard Johansen                                http://arj.nvg.org/
Confusion among -ate ~ -ant pairs is even more prominate, since both
are legitimant suffixes. --Adam Albright