Re: [lojban] RE: Re: emotions

[Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>]

At 11:53 PM 5/26/03 +1000, Nick Nicholas wrote:
>To And's puzzlement, all I have to respond with is: gismu are a closed
>class. ...

[Agreed with Nick's response]

>And with all respect to jbovlaste, I don't see anyone expecting that
>the entirety of its contents will ever constitute a baseline
>(especially if it is to be issued in the next three years).

It is not that it will constitute a baseline, but rather that it will be 
USED as the reference standard for the language "because it is there".  (As 
you noted, the official dictionary is not there - even though it isn't 
"vaporware", but merely draft - but then so is jbovlaste.)

Thus I note that jbofi'e seems to have displaced the official parser, and 
the E-BNF which was the unofficial  grammar standard displaced the YACC in 
usage to the point that it was added to CLL and hence made part of the 
baseline, and now people find "errors" in the language based on jbofi'e and 
the E-BNF.

Because users can freely add to it WITHOUT any vetting on their additions, 
people will add to jbovlaste.  And because it is readily available for word 
lookup, those who live on the net will USE jbovlaste.  Thus it stands to 
overwhelm any and all baseline standards by its mere existence, if it 
permits non-baseline-standard entry/display on equal terms with 
baseline-standard work.

I don't see any easy solution - I realize the amount of work that went into 
jbovlaste, and the apparent fact that people like it a lot better than they 
liked editing "noralujv" and the draft dictionary files (which I admit we 
never provided a good editing/commenting mechanism for).

(And I realize your criticism that I should be adding standard words to 
compete with the nonstandard ones.  But people want me to serve my last 
time as President productively, and you also want me to respond to 
supplication on byfy and maybe do more besides, so official obligations 
have taken precedent over word building, even though I admit the latter is 
more fun for me than the other stuff).

>Gismu and
>camvo are baselined. I really don't see the point in a large set of
>lujvo or fu'ivla being in a baseline. In a reference dictionary, sure.

Which jbovlaste, unedited, will be.

>But I don't set on such a dictionary the canonical value I place on the
>fundamental building blocks of the language.

As canon, I agree.  But I look at what the community USES, and they are 
USING jbovlaste.

>(This counters Bob's vision of the dictionary.

Not sure what you think my vision is.  But your vision as presented is not 
that unlike mine.  I just recognize what the user-community and the world 
think about dictionaries supersedes what the linguists think about them.

>  But then, Bob has his vision, and I have mine. And I continue to think 
> his vision naive.)

My argument on this issue is based on the fact that I KNOW my ideal for the 
dictionary is naive when jbovlaste is a reality.  And I don't have time (or 
web-programming knowhow) to come up with my own alternative, so I am stuck 
with complaining, and hoping I can stimulate others into acting as needed.

lojbab

-- 
lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                    703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/GSaulB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/