Difference between revisions of "veljvo"

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Text replace - "jbocre: ([a-z])" to "$1")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{se inspekte/en}}'''veljvo''', a [[tanru]] turned into a [[lujvo]] (via the rules of [[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]]).
  
The ''veljvo'' is the ''tanru'' which is turned into a ''lujvo'' (hopefully via the rules of [[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]]).
+
Not every word in the '''veljvo''' needs to be represented by a '''rafsi''' in the '''lujvo'''. A gismu which contributes no places to the place structure of the '''lujvo''', or a cmavo like '''ke''' or '''bo''' which is there to make the '''tanru''' correct, may be omitted if the resulting word isn't likely to be confused with something else. Sometimes even a SE word can be omitted, if the concept is important enough and any other arrangement of the places wouldn't make sense. This occurs, for example, in the word '''brivla'''.
  
Not every word in the ''veljvo'' needs to be represented by a ''rafsi'' in the ''lujvo''. A gismu which contributes no places to the place structure of the ''lujvo'', or a cmavo like ''ke'' or ''bo'' which is there to make the ''tanru'' correct, may be omitted if the resulting word isn't likely to be confused with something else. Sometimes even a SE word can be omitted, if the concept is important enough and any other arrangement of the places wouldn't make sense. This occurs, for example, in the word ''brivla''.
+
The '''veljvo''' is written with omitted components in brackets or parentheses. The place structure uses abbreviations such as '''c1''', using the first letter of the gismu the place comes from. If one place in the '''lujvo''' comes from multiple '''gismu''', the respective places are separated with =.
  
''I question this. Put all your cmavo and gismu in your lujvo, split it into a tanru, or use a more general concept. Whether a word is likely to be confused with something else is hard to tell without context, and may often be a cultural bias.-- [[Adam|Adam]]''
+
===Defining===
 +
This is the form sometimes used when defining a new [[lujvo|lujvo]]:
  
This is the form I use when defining a new [[lujvo|lujvo]]:
+
'''lujvo''': '''veljvo''': brief translation: place structure
 
 
'''''lujvo''''': ''veljvo'': ''brief translation''''place structure''
 
 
 
''Could you give us the [[Gismu Deep Structure|Gismu Deep Structure]] too?''
 
 
 
The ''veljvo'' is written with omitted components in brackets or parentheses. The place structure uses abbreviations such as '''c1''', using the first letter of the gismu the place comes from. If one place in the ''lujvo'' comes from multiple ''gismu'', the respective places are separated with =.
 
  
 
An example (from the GNOME translation):
 
An example (from the GNOME translation):
 +
* '''nermutmi'i''': '''nenri (ke) mucti minji''': ''applet'': ''mi1=mu1=n1 is an applet for use mi2 running within program n2''
 +
Sometimes the [[ralju brivla deep structure]] can be provided too.
  
'''nermutmi'i''': nenri (ke) mucti minji: appletmi1=mu1=n1 is an applet for use mi2 running within program n2
+
===Discussion===
 
+
* [[Adam|Adam]]:
Neither the lujvo list nor what there is so far of the dictionary server has any mechanism for showing omitted words in the ''veljvo''. It would be nice if they did, because trying to make lujvo without allowing for omitted components might cause one to give up on [[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]] and just fudge the place structure.
+
** I question this. Put all your cmavo and gismu in your lujvo, split it into a tanru, or use a more general concept. Whether a word is likely to be confused with something else is hard to tell without context, and may often be a cultural bias.
 
+
* Neither the lujvo list nor what there is so far of the dictionary server has any mechanism for showing omitted words in the '''veljvo'''. It would be nice if they did, because trying to make lujvo without allowing for omitted components might cause one to give up on [[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]] and just fudge the place structure.
* ... or adjust the veljvo accordingly. -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]].
+
** [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]:
** Which often leads to unwieldy lujvo. It's not like omitting lujvo components is anything new or revolutionary: [[the Book|the Book]] demonstrates it with ''sheepdog'' = ''lanme [[jitro|jitro]] gerku'' = ''[[lange'u|lange'u]]''.
+
*** ... or adjust the veljvo accordingly.
 
+
**** Which often leads to unwieldy lujvo. It's not like omitting lujvo components is anything new or revolutionary: [[the Book|the Book]] demonstrates it with ''sheepdog'' = '''lanme [jitro] gerku = [[lange'u|lange'u]]'''.
*** It is revolutionary. That is called an "anomalous lujvo" in [[the Book|the Book]].
+
***** [[rab.spir|rab.spir:]]
 
+
****** It is revolutionary. That is called an "anomalous lujvo" in [[the Book|the Book]].
--[[rab.spir|rab.spir]]
+
******* "Anomalous" does not mean "bad".  '''lange'u''' is a perfectly reasonable lujvo.
 
+
******** Not necessarily ''bad'', but certainly ''non-[[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]]''.
**** "Anomalous" does not mean "bad".  ''lange'u'' is a perfectly reasonable lujvo.
+
** [[Jay Kominek|Jay]]:
**** Not necessarily ''bad'', but certainly ''non-[[seljvajvo|seljvajvo]]''.
+
*** [[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]] has a free-form-ish field for the components of a [[lujvo|lujvo]] which is intended to contain a "+" separated list of the components of the [[lujvo|lujvo]] in question. It is separate from the place mapping of the lujvo, which is intended to allow you to produce a list of all [[lujvo|lujvo]] which have '''mluni'''2 mapped to their x3 place, for instance. The "components" field of [[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]] could easily allow for [[lujvo|lujvo]] to have some of their components bracketed to indicate they did not contribute rafsi to the final form. (FWIW, I've spent many a man-day wracking my brain over the design of [[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]], just because you can't see it yet doesn't mean I don't support it.
 
 
----
 
 
 
[[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]] has a free-form-ish field for the components of a [[lujvo|lujvo]] which is intended to contain a + separated list of the components of the [[lujvo|lujvo]] in question. It is separate from the place mapping of the lujvo, which is intended to allow you to produce a list of all [[lujvo|lujvo]] which have mluni2 mapped to their x3 place, for instance. The ''components'' field of [[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]] could easily allow for [[lujvo|lujvo]] to have some of their components bracketed to indicate they did not contribute rafsi to the final form. (FWIW, I've spent many a man-day wracking my brain over the design of [[jbovlaste|jbovlaste]], just because you can't see it yet doesn't mean I don't support it. :) --[[Jay Kominek|Jay]]
 
 
 
''How about a way to enter the [[Gismu Deep Structure|Gismu Deep Structure]]? -- Adam''
 

Latest revision as of 10:31, 25 September 2014

veljvo, a tanru turned into a lujvo (via the rules of seljvajvo).

Not every word in the veljvo needs to be represented by a rafsi in the lujvo. A gismu which contributes no places to the place structure of the lujvo, or a cmavo like ke or bo which is there to make the tanru correct, may be omitted if the resulting word isn't likely to be confused with something else. Sometimes even a SE word can be omitted, if the concept is important enough and any other arrangement of the places wouldn't make sense. This occurs, for example, in the word brivla.

The veljvo is written with omitted components in brackets or parentheses. The place structure uses abbreviations such as c1, using the first letter of the gismu the place comes from. If one place in the lujvo comes from multiple gismu, the respective places are separated with =.

Defining

This is the form sometimes used when defining a new lujvo:

lujvo: veljvo: brief translation: place structure

An example (from the GNOME translation):

  • nermutmi'i: nenri (ke) mucti minji: applet: mi1=mu1=n1 is an applet for use mi2 running within program n2

Sometimes the ralju brivla deep structure can be provided too.

Discussion

  • Adam:
    • I question this. Put all your cmavo and gismu in your lujvo, split it into a tanru, or use a more general concept. Whether a word is likely to be confused with something else is hard to tell without context, and may often be a cultural bias.
  • Neither the lujvo list nor what there is so far of the dictionary server has any mechanism for showing omitted words in the veljvo. It would be nice if they did, because trying to make lujvo without allowing for omitted components might cause one to give up on seljvajvo and just fudge the place structure.
    • nitcion:
      • ... or adjust the veljvo accordingly.
        • Which often leads to unwieldy lujvo. It's not like omitting lujvo components is anything new or revolutionary: the Book demonstrates it with sheepdog = lanme [jitro] gerku = lange'u.
          • rab.spir:
            • It is revolutionary. That is called an "anomalous lujvo" in the Book.
              • "Anomalous" does not mean "bad". lange'u is a perfectly reasonable lujvo.
                • Not necessarily bad, but certainly non-seljvajvo.
    • Jay:
      • jbovlaste has a free-form-ish field for the components of a lujvo which is intended to contain a "+" separated list of the components of the lujvo in question. It is separate from the place mapping of the lujvo, which is intended to allow you to produce a list of all lujvo which have mluni2 mapped to their x3 place, for instance. The "components" field of jbovlaste could easily allow for lujvo to have some of their components bracketed to indicate they did not contribute rafsi to the final form. (FWIW, I've spent many a man-day wracking my brain over the design of jbovlaste, just because you can't see it yet doesn't mean I don't support it.