User:Gleki/CLL, next edition

From Lojban
< User:Gleki
Revision as of 15:19, 9 July 2019 by Gleki (talk | contribs) (active PRs, problematic or those that must be active)
Jump to: navigation, search

An ever-being-updated list of suggestions for the next revision of CLL:

active PRs, problematic or those that must be active

A to-be-prepared list of changes for CLL 1.3: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_VLK57x-PMdO275CiPTb_cBsGg6mz0Jfd4ltPaNET6o/edit#

others

  • internal grammar of UI
  • ch 7 Section 6, the exceptions to the anaphora rules are almost certainly incomplete. In particular "ma" and "ce'u" definitely warrant exceptions.
  • add missing parts from nitcion's https://mw.lojban.org/papri/lujvo_place_structure and https://mw.lojban.org/papri/Pro-sumti/pro-bridi_paper,_draft_1.1
  • ch 10 12 Section 12, the explanation of the meaning of the second "pu" in example 12.2 conflicts with the rule in section 13 that tenses in subordinate bridi are relative to the tense of the main bridi.
  • ch 10 18 Section 18, example 18.9 is supposed to show scalar negation of tenses not limited to PU and FAhA, but the example tense is ri'u (FAhA2).
  • 18.19 and 19.7 - merge into one
  • 11.12 The phrase {le ka la frank ciska} is glossed as "The quality-of Frank's writing". {ka} glosses to the word "property", and the Lojban doesn't talk at all about quality (as in jezyprane), so I believe the word "quality" was accidentally put there, having bled into the interlinear gloss from the author's intended natural English translation. That said, I (Zort) believe the gloss should be "The property-that Frank writes". That said, I (still Zort) have a humble suggestion for a demonstration of this section's grammatical feature, a cynical little observation, that has occured in my Lojban speech "in the wild", and perhaps therefore proves at least some usefulness of this grammatical feature: {le'e prenu cu djica lo mu'e jenai za'i gunka}.
  • The tengwar table should use actual tengwar in addition to their names, since we now have Unicode (CSUR) and good fonts.
  • 4.7 In the procedure for making a non-Lojban word into a valid Stage 3 fu'ivla, double consonants are to be eliminated before the sounds are to be converted to their closest Lojban equivalents, but it is possible that consecutive consonants have different sounds (like in 'eccentric'). So these actions should swap places. The same goes for section 8, in the procedure for Lojbanizing a name.
  • Chapter 10 It would be nice if there was a template for compound tenses around the end of the chapter, like the template for compound cnima'o in chapter 13 section 8.
  • see what's left at CLL, aka Reference Grammar, Errata
  • take parts from suggestions for CLL, second edition here and there
  • ch3. Section 6, restriction no. 2 already forbids 8 of the 12 consonant pairs that are forbidden by restriction no. 3; perhaps it's better to just explicitly forbid the pairs "cs", "jz", "sc" and "zj" like in the last restriction.
  • pr according to Existential import, change mentions of "existential import" in CLL accordingly. see https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bpfk-list/7NUB_ZT6vtI/h-WBVrAYxeYJ
  • A lot of this terminology is used without being defined. We should formally define the terminology that is import to understanding the grammar and syntax of Lojban, preferably in a sidebar outside of the main text.
  • add cu after all cmevla when CMEVLA brivla constructs arises otherwise
  •  ??? can't confirm. ch3. Section 2, page 30. for the second eng (immediately to the left of "(may be syllabic)") the syllabicity marker is concealed by the right tail. I can just barely see the marker under a good light.