[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Technical, Help Request: What information *should* a Lojban dictionary system have?
On Sep 11, 2010, at 20:40, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
What if there was detailed information about the places *and*
something like what we now call gloss words? That is, words that
describe the whole relationship?
That's a verb and prepositions, which is Bad.
Now, how would that look such that it was stored in a more
machine-understandable way and not as actual strings of English
text?
It's the giant strings of English text thing that I most want to get
away from; it's caused us nothing but trouble IME.
I argue that the English text is necessary, and that the problem that
you're seeing is from that we always use the same English text. We
already use many/several/a variety of English words separated/
interspersed/divided by spaces to convey the broadness of gismu; we
need to do the same with sentence structure to convey the nonverbness
of gismu.
Another question we should be asking (and I haven't thought about the
answer yet) is: what definition format encourages word inventors to
think clearly about their definition?
The definition sentences that jbovlaste/the gismu list use now feel
more like a 'formal definition' than dropping a bunch of English
keywords into slots would. (Though of course I haven't tried it.
Quick, someone name all the biases I'm exhibiting.)
Oh yeah, here's another argument: There are better things we could be
doing than rewriting all the jbovlaste definitions. Like rewriting
only the cmavo definitions :)
--
Kevin Reid <http://switchb.org/kpreid/>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.