On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Pierre Abbat
<phma@bezitopo.org> wrote:
I think we should drop the direction place of "mitre" and the subunit places.
I have no idea what to put in a subunit place,
I'm pretty sure it's there to be an identifier: {gutci fo la.intc.} (feet) vs. {gutci fo lo degji} (cubit).
It's seems a circumspect way to do so to me, though, and I'm just guessing.
If that is indeed the intention, I agree that that place is pointless and should be dropped, possibly replacing it with a me'e place. (In the x2, pushing the rest one down?)
and the direction place could be expressed with a preposition if appropriate. "gucti" has just as much reason to have a direction place as "mitre" does, but "caltre" has none, even though by jvojva it has to have one if "mitre" does.
Well, sure, I see your argument. I don't disagree. I said minimal, for reasons of past-usage breaking, whereas as what you're suggesting, I would call "optimal".
> 1) Take the whole of the gismu, possibly including the experimental ones,
> and group them into families. Species {badna}, Transportation {klama}, Mode
> of Travel {cadzu}, Measurement {mitre}, and Comparatives {barda} are a few
> families I can think of off the top of my head. Species might need to be
> split into the kingdoms (animal, plant, etc.) just because of size.
There's no big problem with species. There are a few species words with a
third place (tirxu, mledi, lanme, mlafi'e) and one missing x2 (remna), which
should have it, as paleontologist talk about several species of Homo.
I was referring to the grouping, not the consistency, in this. Obviously the size of a gismu family isn't really relevant to the consistency issue.