[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] nilbroda
- To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: [lojban] nilbroda
- From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <lojbab@lojban.org>
- Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 21:12:35 -0500
- In-reply-to: <01022520392005.19379@neofelis>
- References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010222185345.00b9a4e0@127.0.0.1> <4.3.2.7.2.20010221150126.00b6d280@127.0.0.1> <4.3.2.7.2.20010216215932.00af0130@127.0.0.1> <4.3.2.7.2.20010222185345.00b9a4e0@127.0.0.1>
At 08:37 PM 02/25/2001 -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote:
It's still not clear to me. For a non-variadic nilbroda, what is the
convention? Should I go by the reference grammar, which puts ni2 at the
end, or
the dictionary, which puts it second?
The answer is that you get to decide for yourself. The reference grammar
states a non-binding convention. The draft dictionary contains some
attempts to define words, but those attempts are not "baselined" and in
fact have for the most part never been reviewed for consistency with the
rules. (Nora started once, but found after several hundred words that her
understandings of the rules was changing and that thus her analysis was
inconsistent - she has not had time to start over again.)
If usage clearly points towards one approach or the other, then probably
that approach will tend to predominate in the final dictionary, because
usage trumps theory with respect to dictionary word meanings.
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