slang gismu: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


moved from [[jbocre: exploiting the preparser|exploiting the preparser]]
'''list includes lujvo made from slang gismu'''


----
;'''''lezbo''''' lesbian: x1 is a lesbian [[jbocre: na'e mabla|na'e mabla]] [[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
 
I'm rather suspicious of suggestions coming from you as to how to modify the lexical or parsing stages of machine recognition, as I recall it taking a rather significant amount of effort to explain the parsing process to you. And there are always things which end up not being easy to say in a language. You cannot ensure that every utterance that ''you think might be popular in your broken version of Lojban'' is short. Further, you have no statistically significant evidence of anything needed to be made more concise, one way or the other. Without such evidence, suggestions of shortening things is just so much hot, unwanted air.
 
----
 
I moved this from the original page, because this bit:
 
;:"You cannot ensure that every utterance that ''you think might be popular in your broken version of Lojban'' is short. Further, you have no statistically significant evidence of anything needed to be made more concise, one way or the other."
 
lowers the calibre of discussion insufferably. The least that can be expected is that the commentary actually address the content of what is commented on and not some travesty of it. For general ideological commentary, there are separate pages where that can be discussed.
 
''I'm rather suspicious of suggestions coming from you as to how to modify the lexical or parsing stages of machine recognition, as I recall it taking a rather significant amount of effort to explain the parsing process to you.''
 
* If you don't understand the parsing process well, then this is fair comment, and you can wait until someone competent passes comment. If you are competent to judge the feasibility of exploiting the preparser in this way, then you can do so.
 
''And there are always things which end up not being easy to say in a language.''


* That cannot fail to be true; how could it be otherwise? But you miss the point that there is in language a relationship between length and frequency: the more frequently something is said, the shorter it gets. The proposal to exploit the preparser was intended to provide a way to emulate this property of natural language, which is otherwise denied to Lojban.
;'''''lezge''''' homosexual: x1 is homosexual [[jbocre: na'e mabla|na'e mabla]] [[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]


''You cannot ensure that every utterance that ''you think might be popular in your broken version of Lojban'' is short.''
;'''''pufke''''' poof: x1 is a poof, homosexual man [[jbocre: na'e mabla|na'e mabla]] [[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]


* (am at a loss to find tactful response to this...)
;'''''tolpufke''''' heterosexual: x1 is heterosexual [[jbocre: na'e mabla|na'e mabla]] [[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]


''Further, you have no statistically significant evidence of anything needed to be made more concise, one way or the other.''
;'''''tilju''''' x1 is a pedant [[jbocre: Adjective: pedantic]] (This was made by shortening the lujvo ''tilju'edu'u'', which is perhaps the most 'proper' word for this concept)
 
* Indeed not, that is why "Some sort of statistical calculation could be performed on a large body of mature usage in order to ascertain what sort of string substitutions would yield the greatest gain in terms of concision."
 
''Without such evidence, suggestions of shortening things is just so much hot, unwanted air.''
 
* What would it be with such evidence? Not hot unwanted air? The page you were commenting on is unmistakably located in a section where you cannot possibly be misled into thinking you are being offered something that you want. You know in advance that everything in that section is something you don't want or value. Furthermore, if you are Jay, then aren't you doing an MA in linguistics? I find it incredible that someone doing an MA in linguistics thinks it is unwanted hot air to point how Lojban's unambiguous grammar could emulate natural language processes of shortening. If you're not Jay, then apologies to Jay.


----
----


I don't know if we have anything quite as silly as ''que est-ce que c'est'',
As with all these (to my mind treasonous :-) ) proposals, could you please indicate who the proposer is, and whether they have seen any use in text? Same request has been made for experimental cmavo -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]
 
but it is one of the charms of linguistic exoticism that languages differ


wildly in what they feel a need for concision in (c.f. "They Have a Word For
PS. I'd add ''norlezge'' for bi (or transsexual), but I don't want to actually encourage this stuff... ('slang gismu', that is; not bisexuality!)


It").
How come ''pufke'' is ''na'e mabla''?  At least the English keyword sounds mabla-ish to me.  Similarly, if you want an uncontroversial term for "heterosexual man," stick with ''tolylezge'' (after all, ''tolpufke'' doesn't make sense for women either). All of this presumably treats sexual preference, not "manliness," machismo, effeminateness, butch-ness, etc (if so, again, ''pufke'' doesn't belong).  All in all, I, too, am not really impressed by these ''--mi'e mark.''


* ''que est-ce que c'est'' = [[jbocre: keskse|keskse]] -- not so long. We can find very short words in English that are very rare. But how often do we find long words or phrases that are of very high frequency? In BrE, for example, the apparently long but common word ''particularly'' -- 5 sylls in citation form -- is reduced to /p(@)tIkli/ -- 2 sylls.
*Hopefully ''pufke'' being na'e mabla will help demablatize the English word ''poof'' to you, then. And yes, they treat sexual preference, not manliness, effeminacy, etc. [[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]] (& btw, Mark, I think [[jbocre: terki|terki]] is ace.) '''Thanks (I always need reassurance)!  Maybe it should grow into its own page at some point though. --mark'''

Revision as of 17:14, 4 November 2013

list includes lujvo made from slang gismu

lezbo lesbian
x1 is a lesbian na'e mabla And Rosta
lezge homosexual
x1 is homosexual na'e mabla And Rosta
pufke poof
x1 is a poof, homosexual man na'e mabla And Rosta
tolpufke heterosexual
x1 is heterosexual na'e mabla And Rosta
tilju x1 is a pedant jbocre: Adjective: pedantic (This was made by shortening the lujvo tilju'edu'u, which is perhaps the most 'proper' word for this concept)

As with all these (to my mind treasonous :-) ) proposals, could you please indicate who the proposer is, and whether they have seen any use in text? Same request has been made for experimental cmavo -- nitcion

PS. I'd add norlezge for bi (or transsexual), but I don't want to actually encourage this stuff... ('slang gismu', that is; not bisexuality!)

How come pufke is na'e mabla? At least the English keyword sounds mabla-ish to me. Similarly, if you want an uncontroversial term for "heterosexual man," stick with tolylezge (after all, tolpufke doesn't make sense for women either). All of this presumably treats sexual preference, not "manliness," machismo, effeminateness, butch-ness, etc (if so, again, pufke doesn't belong). All in all, I, too, am not really impressed by these --mi'e mark.

  • Hopefully pufke being na'e mabla will help demablatize the English word poof to you, then. And yes, they treat sexual preference, not manliness, effeminacy, etc. And Rosta (& btw, Mark, I think terki is ace.) Thanks (I always need reassurance)! Maybe it should grow into its own page at some point though. --mark