[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Problematic entries in the lujvo list
At 01:55 PM 11/25/2000 +0100, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote:
While reviewing the lujvo list, I have come across several entries which
seem erroneous or problematic, and which I don't know quite how to deal with.
For instance, "baljamna" is glossed as "great war", but the place structure
clearly shows that the x1 of "baljamna" is the same as that of "jamna" --
ie. "to be at war with". So the keyword should be changed.
Keywords do not necessarily have to refer to the x1 of the brivla. They
indicate briefly the concept, which the place structure and definition may
elaborate on to indicate how the keyword relates to the brivla. In this
case it sounds like the keyword actually refers to the nu event of the
brivla. Adding such an annotation is a good idea, but does not mean that
the keyword is wrong - merely that we need a second lujvo for the nu event.
"Great
warrior" seems to be more like "balsoi", and "to be greatly at war" seems
to long-winded. Any suggestions?
Then I have noticed that several entries in the lujvo list are more than
one word long! For instance, this one:
limna bravau limna barda+vasru: swimming pool
Should such entries be kept in the lujvo list, or perhaps moved somewhere
else? (A tanru list?)
The lujvo list was originally created by Nick Nicholas. It consisted of
the lujvo that had appeared in texts, and where he found those lujvo
malformed or inappropriate, he suggested alternatives, which sometimes were
better as tanru than as lujvo. We thus keep them in the lujvo list because
the are replacements or alternatives to other lujvo that appeared in
text. This type of thing will show up easily when the lists are compiled
into the dictionary.
Finally, it is possible that a lujvo may have no common use on its own, but
will usually appear in either longer lujvo or as part of tanru, thus the
existence as part of a suggested tanru again helps give us an English keyword.
Finally, I've come across "cfatse", which is intended to mean "sit down".
But "zutse" already means "sit down", so this lujvo is pleonastic at best,
and meaningless at worst. Any ideas as to how to interpret this? (Has the
meaning of "zutse" ever been plainly "sit"?)
It means plainly "sit" with additional metaphorical example for actions
that resemble sitting (being in a sitting position). (Does a cat or dog
"sit" in the human sense? Not really. Can a book sit on a table? maybe,
but I don't think it can be said to zutse. On the other hand, a toy doll
could be described with zutse if the position was recognizably like that of
human sitting.)
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