I've only been studying Lojban for about 8 months; however, for a while now, I have felt that the dictionary needs some work. (There are multiple dictionaries, but I believe all or most of them get their data from the same source: la jbovlaste.)
Specifically, I think the dictionary entries need more usage notes, and some explanation of the semantics of the sumti for each selbri, and examples to help illustrate all the important points. My recent discussions on IRC about the definition of {cukta} provide a good example of why: Tonight and last night, I asked about what sorts of things might fill the x2 (and even the x1) of the selbri {cukta}. I thought was I asking fairly simple clarifying questions, but both times, I apparently ignited rather lengthy discussions. This was not merely so much philosophical navel-gazing either. Tonight's discussions did seem to eventually reach some consensus on the place structure for {cukta}... This is what we came up with:
- x1 of {cukta} refers to a particular copy of a book -- rather than the more abstract sense of "book" as in a literary work, a pattern of words and/or images. Sumti which could fill the x1 would include {ti} when pointing to a physical copy, or a file path for an ebook copy.
- x2 could be anything from a quote of the entire contents of the book; a quote of a shorter selection of the book; random keywords that happen to appear in the book; a word or phrase which describes some of the book's contents; a list of topics, or a single main topic; a table of contents; or even just a more general description of the book (e.g., {ti cukta lo clani} = "this is a long book").
- the rest of the sumti were less controversial:
- x3 = the author of the book
- x4 = the intended audience (such as "young adults" for YA fiction)
- x5 is a little odd, maybe. You could say {lo pelji} for a print book, but an ebook would be something like "disk" or "electrons" or something...
If the above explanation of {cukta} is accurate, then the given definition in la jbovlaste and the other dictionaries is woefully inadequate. If the above explanation is wrong, then the lojban community needs clarification even more badly.
The difference between fuzzy, abstract concepts like "truth" versus "fact", may always give rise to occasional semantic debate. But I should think the meaning of words like "book" should not be so difficult to pin down: the entry for {cukta} needs to be updated.
More broadly, I think updating the lojban dictionaries in general should be considered an urgently important task. We all want to grow the community, and that will be much easier when the dictionaries do a better job of offering consensus and clarity around word meanings.
I also think the dictionary edits ought to be done by people who are expert enough in Lojban to be fairly authoritative. I realize my proposal means a lot of work, and that the number of "authoritative experts" is still fairly low, but I think it's important to make sure the dictionaries are actually accurate. I've run into a lot of confusion and frustration over dictionary definitions, so I'm trying my best to help make things better: I myself could proofread the (English) definitions, to offer feedback to make sure the entries are as clear as possible.
What do you think?
ki'e mu'o
~Andrew / la cemjig