BPFK Section: Text Structure Discursives Posted by arj on Sun 10 of Jun, 2007 19:22 GMT posts: 953 Use this thread to discuss the page: BPFK Section: Text Structure Discursives
Posted by arj on Sun 10 of Jun, 2007 19:28 GMT posts: 953 Something has gone wrong with the partitioning of cmavo into BPFK sections. I see "pau (nai)" and "bi'u (nai)" both in this section and in BPFK Section: Discursives. There may be more. We have top come up with some sensible partitioning before voting. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ I owe, I owe - so off to work I go.
Posted by Anonymous on Sun 10 of Jun, 2007 19:44 GMT On 6/10/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote: > Something has gone wrong with the partitioning of cmavo into BPFK sections. > > I see "pau (nai)" and "bi'u (nai)" both in this section and in BPFK > Section: Discursives. There may be more. I noticed only those two too. > We have top come up with some sensible partitioning before voting. In the cmavo lists they appear as UI3a, so in theory they would belong here, but since your section comes first for voting we might leave them there. mu'o mi'e xorxes
Posted by Anonymous on Sun 10 of Jun, 2007 20:14 GMT > I see "pau (nai)" and "bi'u (nai)" both in this section and in BPFK Section: Discursives. I have now removed them from this section. mi'e xorxes
Posted by arj on Sun 10 of Jun, 2007 21:18 GMT posts: 953 Since you have "Proposed Definition" as the headline, do you intend to not write keywords for these cmavo? -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Someone just called to say he loved you?!
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 11 of Jun, 2007 16:02 GMT On 6/10/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote: > Since you have "Proposed Definition" as the headline, do you > intend to not write keywords for these cmavo? I had no intentions one way or the other, actually. Now I have added them. What are the keywords for anyway? They should obviously not be part of a Lojban->English dictionary. They can be helpful in the production of an English->Lojban one, but they can't be automatically turned into one. mu'o mi'e xorxes
Posted by arj on Mon 11 of Jun, 2007 19:54 GMT posts: 953 On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 01:07:18PM -0300, Jorge LlambÃas wrote: > On 6/10/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote: > >Since you have "Proposed Definition" as the headline, do you > >intend to not write keywords for these cmavo? > > I had no intentions one way or the other, actually. > Now I have added them. > > What are the keywords for anyway? They should obviously not be > part of a Lojban->English dictionary. > They can be helpful in the > production of an English->Lojban one, but they can't be automatically > turned into one. Why not? -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Dwi'n gallu llefaru pob llinell heb atal, oherwydd does dim tafod gyda fi.
Posted by Anonymous on Mon 11 of Jun, 2007 20:20 GMT On 6/11/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 01:07:18PM -0300, Jorge Llambas wrote: > > > > They can be helpful in the > > production of an English->Lojban one, but they can't be automatically > > turned into one. > > Why not? Because we wouldn't (at least I wouldn't) want an entry in an English->Lojban dictionary for "indirect question", for example. Under the headword "what", I would expect to find both "ma" and "ma kau", with suitable explanations (as well as "ki'a", "ke'o", etc.) Or perhaps I shouldn't have "indirect question" as the keyword for "kau", but there doesn't seem to be anything in English that will serve as a _translation_ of "kau". I can only give a description. mu'o mi'e xorxes
