Re: [lojban] Homonyms in Stage 3 fu'ivla

[guskant <gusni.kantu@gmail.com>]

ki'e la'oi Pierre

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
> On Sunday, February 26, 2012 20:41:18 guskant wrote:
>> coi
>>
>> The algorithm of making a non-Lojban word into a valid Stage 3 fu'ivla
>> may produce homonyms.
>> For example, a Mexican may produce "djartako" from taco, while a
>> Japanese may produce "djartako" from octopus dish.
>> Is there algorithm to select one of them?
>
> "djartako" is a type-4, you mean "cidjrtako",

I simply used the term "Stage 3" used in the CLL 4.7:
"The rafsi categorizes or limits the meaning of the fu'ivla [...].
Such a Stage 3 borrowing is the most common kind of fu'ivla."
"Stage 4 fu'ivla do not have any rafsi classifier, and are used where
a fu'ivla has become so common or so important that it must be made as
short as possible."
I don't know another classification method.

>
> Something somewhat similar happened with Chinese provinces. There are two
> called "Shanxi" in different tones. In English, one of them is arbitrarily
> spelled with two a's. There's also a country with three languages called Pong.
> I don't know if they have different tones, or even what kind of tones they
> have.
>

Homonyms from the same language can be translated into Lojban
in distinctive fu'ivla forms with some rules. In the case of modern
Mandarin, we may create a rule that four tones [˥], [˧˥], [˨˩˦], [˥˩]
are represented by symbolic consonants l, m, n, r respectively. In the
case of violating the rule of consonant clusters, just omit the
symbolic consonant for that fu'ivla.

With this rule, two "Shanxi"s 山西 and 陕西 can be translated into Lojban
fu'ivla as tutrcanlci and tutrcanci respectively.

On the other hand, it seems that homonyms from different languages
cannot be managed with reasonable rules. However, "fu'ivla (like other
brivla) are not permitted to have more than one definition. (CLL 4.7)"

According to CLL 4.7, "Stage 3 fu'ivla can be made easily on the fly,
as lujvo can, because the procedure for forming them always guarantees
a word that cannot violate any of the rules." This statement is not
true for "djartako".

"Stage 4 fu'ivla require running tests that are not simple to
characterize or perform, and should be made only after deliberation
and by someone knowledgeable about all the considerations that apply.
(CLL 4.7)" Yes, and because of "djartako", running tests must be
applied also to Stage 3 fu'ivla.

> There
> isn't, and can't be, an algorithm to decide this. There can be a protocol (the
> multiparty equivalent of an algorithm).

Which protocol can be there?

mi'e guskant mu'o

-- 
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.