Re: [lojban] criteria for the dictionary

[Pierre Abbat <phma@bezitopo.org>]

On Monday, January 14, 2013 04:55:12 jongausib wrote:
> If there's someday is going to be a complete, official lojban dictionary, I
> think there's a need for some criteria for what jbovlaste should contain
> and in which form.
> 
> Right now the dictionary is rather finite, but with more contributors it
> could expand to an extreme extent.
> I think it's a good idea to discuss this issue now, so I don't contribute
> with a lot of valsi now, and then a few years later someone delete a lot of
> my work, because they don't fit into some future official template or list
> of criteria.
> 
> *Vocabulary*
> 1. Should we try to add lujvo for all places of each gismu as distinct
> valsi, like {seldri}, {selbai}, {terni'i} etc?

Only if they are glossed as different words, such as "tervecnu". We don't need 
lots of entries for "species of <animal>".

> 2. What kind of cmene/cmevla should be added? (with no restriction this set
> could be extremely large)

Names of countries, cities, oblasti, cantons, etc.
Names of diseases.
Names of well-known people (including Lojbanists who are well-known among 
Lojbanists but may not be well-known to the world).
Given names (there may be more than one form of a given name).
Probably some others. I just added "relcibjolmib", a few days after hearing la 
.camgusmis. talk about it (in English).

A few names can't be entered because they're two or more words (e.g. 
"kot.divuár").

> For example, we could add recommendation that you only should add cmene
> that could be regarded as having a lexicographical value, like the most
> common names of persons, companies, geographical entities etc. Not the name
> of the street where you are living and shit like that.
> 
> 3. What kind of fu'ivla should be added?
> 
> With ALL names of species and chemical substances and other large sets, we
> are going to have a very huge dictionary.
> I've been trying to translate some names of species into lujvo (the
> solution I prefer), but the latin names are often not very descriptive
> and/or logical, so I think one of the better solution (at least for names
> of species etc, you use relative often) is to just lojbanize the latin
> names into fu'ivla.
> 
> You'll probably already discussed this a lot, but it would be nice to have
> some guidelines documented somewhere about standards. I believe lojban
> standards about biology, chemistry, music theory and other scientific
> disciplines, doesn't belong to the official grammar of lojban (as little as
> Oxford style manual is normative for ALL kind of English language), but
> still it would be nice to have such guidelines (on a level below the
> official language). Especially jbovlaste need such guidelines if we don't
> want to have an inconsistent dictionary with a dukse of words in a possible
> future.

You'll have trouble entering many species names, because they're at least 
three words, such as "cionmau la barda" or "maxri la .durum.". Go for genera 
and up. But don't try to enter every single genus of fish until there are 
Lojbanic ichthylogists who would need to use them. I've added a few such as 
"skomberu".

Languages and ethnicities: there are only a few thousand of these, so entering 
a few hundred wouldn't overload the dictionary. I'd enter "pintupi" (which 
I've mentioned) and maybe "olkola" (which is a valid fu'ivla), but not 
"Oykangand" (a language closely related to Olkola) until someone figured out 
the right way to Lojbanize it.

Chemicals: we need to figure out the proper way to Lojbanize IUPAC before 
entering IUPAC lujvo. Simple-named chemicals, such as geosmin (derpanxu'i) or 
capsaicin (xumrkapsiku), can be entered already. 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-di(4-
chlorophenyl)ethane will have to wait. Numbers are used three ways in chemical 
names (the other is to indicate an oxidation state or valency), and we have 
just the one set of numbers to use in lujvo. I've proposed some experimental 
gismu for use in chemical names, such as "xudvu" (aldehyde).

> 4. When is it ok to add a stage-4 fui'vla in the dictionary?
> 
> I know some lojbanist don't like stage-3 fu'ivla. I do like stage-3. The
> prefix in the stage-3 fu'ivla help you understand a little what this
> foreign word is about. And you could make distinctions easily between for
> example {spatrvanila}, {grutrvanila} "vanilla pod", {tsijrvanila} "vanilla
> seed" and {xukmrvanila} vanillin.
> 
> The only stage-4 fu'ivla I add are those which are very cultural specific,
> not easily constructed as a lujvo and/or which doesn't easily fit into some
> cathegory. Stage-4 fu'ivla should also be useful. CLL says: "[stage-4] are
> used where a fu'ivla has become so common or so important that it must be
> made as short as possible."
> 
> But as long as you don't add stage-4 without cause (what's the cause of
> making {konjaku} a stage-4 for example? I've never heard of this species
> before), I think those fu'ivlas could really give a good flavor to the
> language, even if this at the same time means that we're going to learn a
> lot of inconsistent words just like learning natlangs. But stage-4 fu'ivlas
> could be really cool, my favourites are {iklki} and {fi'ikca}.

Konjac is a common ingredient in Japanese cuisine.

For words that fit into the type-4 format without too much squishing, I don't 
see anything wrong with using type 4 to begin with, except where the type-4 
could easily be interpreted as two unrelated things. For instance, I wouldn't 
use the word "malpigi", as it could equally well mean acerola (rutrmalpigi) or 
an insect's excretory organ (ragrmalpigi), both named for Marcello Malpighi. 
This turned out to happen with "konjaku" (someone thought it's cognac, which 
is koinka), but I didn't find out until after I entered it, as I was thinking 
of the Japanese word, which is unrelated to the French word.

I think "tcigaso" should be used as type-4 already. Most people with cars use 
it.

> *Form*
> I think jbovlaste should have a consistent format before publishing a
> printed version. Some poor fellow would therefore have to read through all
> jbovlaste and edit it into a consistent format just before printing. But if
> we would have guidelines from now on already, and we all add valsi in the
> same way, there are going to be less work for someone in the future.
> 
> 1. Form of definition
> Which format do you think should be standard?
> 
> {nerkla}:
> a. n1=k1 enters n2=k2 from origin k3 via route k4 using means/vehicle k5
> 
> b.x1=n1=k1 enters x2=n2=k2 from origin x3=k3 via route x4=k4 using
> means/vehicle x5=k5
> 
> c. x1 enters x2 from origin x3 via route x4 using means/vehicle x5

a for lujvo where the arguments are in order, b where they are not in order, c 
for fu'ivla.

> 2. Etymology
> I suggest that we don't add etymology info in the notes, but use the "add
> etymology"-link in jbovlaste.

I agree. That's what it's there for.

> I think etymology should be mandatory for cmevla and fu'ivla, so you can
> discuss which language to borrow from.
> This is a paranthetical but important question if lojban has ambition to be
> as cultural neutral as possible.
> So one recommendation could be that you always use latin for names of
> species, the language most related to the specific cultural
> phenomena/object (or a derivate of languages if many cultures share the
> same phenomena/object, or in that case maybe esperanto).

I wouldn't always use Latin for species. "skomberu", "polgosu", "sperlanu", 
"merlanu", and "merluci" are all from Greek, Latin, or some descendant thereof 
(though "sperlanu" has a Germanic root), but for the capelin, an important 
forage fish that circles Iceland, I picked the Icelandic word as a source.

> 3. How much info in the notes?
> 
> And also a final question: Is it possible for a user to edit another user's
> notes in jbovlaste, to add info?

It is possible for one user to edit another's definition, but should be done 
sparingly. Jbovlaste isn't Wiktionary.

Speaking of Wiktionary, there are Wiktionaries in English, French, Lojban, and 
other languages. The English Wiktionary, for any modern language (including 
Lojban), requires that three different people agree on a word at least a year 
ago, or it appear in some well-known work. The Lojban Wiktionary doesn't, and 
the French Wiktionary accepts Tsolyani words, which the English Wiktionary 
doesn't. You can enter phrases like "lo xamgu ko li'i" in Wiktionary, but not 
jbovlaste.

Pierre
-- 
La sal en el mar es más que en la sangre.
Le sel dans la mer est plus que dans le sang.

-- 
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.