Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Online Moten Dictionary

Expand Messages
  • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
    ... True enough. ... Exactly! Which is why I stuck with the pipe. ... Gah! l̉ is ugly! ... It s Google s loss, not mine :P . ... I would personally read it as
    Message 1 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
      On 7 March 2013 14:02, A. da Mek <a.da_mek0@...> wrote:

      > ly and ny seem to me intuitive enough for palatals; these digraphs are used
      > for example in Hungarian.
      >

      True enough.


      > But if the palatals and affricates shall be marked alike, then anything
      > intuitive for the first pair will be unintuitive for the second pair.
      >

      Exactly! Which is why I stuck with the pipe.


      > Maybe l̉ n̉ s̉ z̉ could work; this hook may remind an apostrophe which is
      > sometimes used to mark palatalisation and sometimes for a glottal stop,
      > which in a combination with a fricative could suggest the plosive onset of
      > an affricate.
      >

      Gah! l̉ is ugly!


      >
      >
      > In the end, I decided to stick with the pipe.
      >>
      >
      > There is one disadvantage of non-letter characters - Google does not
      > recognize such string as one word.
      >

      It's Google's loss, not mine :P .


      > I considered to use <è èh àh òh> instead of <¨ ¨h ªh ºh> which I am now
      > writing for [?], [h], [X\] and [?\], but a text with è used as a consonat
      > looks like a file with č written in the Central European codepage and then
      > misinterpreted as the Western codepage.
      > It is difficult to find some letter for the glottal stop. The letter з may
      > remind the glyph used by Egyptologists to transcribe the glottal stop, but
      > most people would probably read з either as [Z] or [dz)].
      >

      I would personally read it as a vowel, but that's me :P .

      On 7 March 2013 17:49, BPJ <bpj@...> wrote:

      >
      > Too much mouse-pointing and menu-mucking for my taste.
      >

      Toolbox has lots of keyboard shortcuts :P .


      > I'm basically a plain-text guy. Besides I can sort any
      > which way me pleases (almost) from within perl:
      >
      >
      I'm more a GUI person myself. I like using the keyboard as much as
      possible, but love to be able to fall back on using the mouse if I forget
      commands.


      > <https://metacpan.org/module/Sort::ArbBiLex>
      >
      > You'll notice it's by the same author. He used to be
      > *the* linguist on the CPAN. BTW I have an object-
      > oriented wrapper around this module which allows you to
      > define a sort-key generating function, chuse the
      > normalization form to use during sort[^1], return
      > objects which can tell their string value as well as
      > their sort key and their family rather than as plain
      > strings -- although they stringify to their string
      > values! -- get the entries as a list of lists, one for
      > each family, and give families arbitrary names like
      > "digits". It's in need of documentation, but if anyone
      > is interested I might get around to writing that
      > documentation. It was part of a project to write a
      > Unicode-aware drop-in replacement for makeindex with
      > support for arbitrary sort orders. Maybe one day...
      >
      > [^1]: It's a good idea to use NFD during sorting
      > because then letters with unforeseen decomposable
      > diacritics get sorted under their base letter rather
      > than just ignored!
      >
      >
      See, that's how rusty my programming skills are: I understand everything
      you write, but have no idea how I'd go around implementing it myself! I
      haven't done any serious programming for more than 10 years, and I wasn't
      that great to begin with...


      >
      >> I've actually discovered a PDF entitled "From Toolbox
      >> to LaTeX", with a link to a Perl script and a LaTeX
      >> style that claim to do exactly what I want. It's at:
      >> http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/uploads/media/tb-to-
      >> tex.pdf I've downloaded the scripts, and it seems
      >>
      >> that they could be useful as starting point, but
      >> there's a lot of work needed before either can be
      >> used with my dictionary. You're welcome to scratch
      >> your itch on those if you want (my Perl skills are
      >> basically non-existent. I'm more of a Ruby guy
      >> myself).
      >>
      >
      > Sorry to say but there was a bug which would cause it
      > not to compile right on line 11! Also It's quite
      > ancient from days before perl was unicode-aware or
      > before XeTeX was around! Anyway my itch got kinda
      > piqued, so maybe I'll look into it once my current
      > commission is done in a couple of weeks. I'm unlikely
      > to get a new commission right away anyway.
      >
      >
      See, I would never have found that bug. Perl is not really my forte.


      > Anyway you might probably write something in Ruby to
      > get your database into a datastructure. The parsing
      > code in Text::Shoebox isn't exactly complicated, though
      > it too shows its age.
      >
      >
      The parsing isn't what I fear most. It's the next step, converting the data
      into a useful XeLaTeX file. I'm currently looking at bilingual dictionaries
      typeset in LaTeX to see how I could create a template. My LaTeX programming
      skills are *very* rusty, so I'd rather not have to create my own styles :P .


      >
      > I'm not surprised! I ditched MSW in both senses years
      > ago and haven't looked back. That's part of why I'm
      > reluctant to use Toolbox even under wine.
      >
      >
      I have little choice with my work laptop. At home I use GNU/Linux
      exclusively. That computer has never had any other OS installed on it! :)
      And I don't mind using Toolbox under Wine, it works pretty well.


      >
      > I hardly ever use a WYSIWYG WP program willingly any
      > more; it's vim, pandoc and XeLaTeX all over the place.
      > (*un*willing = paid work is another matter. Luckily
      > OpenOffice/LibreOffice can open most anything they
      > throw at me -- usually .doc(x)!)
      >
      >
      At work I *have* to use all kinds of GUIs. Our entire business nearly runs
      on Excel! :( Not to mention all the modelling tools I have to use.


      > I'd rather have
      >
      >> people plainly not knowing how to pronounce words
      >> rather than people *thinking* they know how to
      >> pronounce words and doing it wrong.
      >>
      >
      > Very good point indeed!
      >
      > But then I suppose you should replace j with y!
      >
      >
      Not here in the Netherlands :P .


      > And I suppose you know that based on your own
      > description of Moten morphophonology and spelling
      > lj nj ts dz would be perfectly unambiguous!
      >
      >
      Very true. But I decided against those digraphs extremely early in the
      design of Moten's orthography. I wanted a true phonemic script, i.e. no
      digraphs, even if those would be unambiguous. I don't treat |l, |n, |s and
      |z as digraphs either, by the way. They are single letters and part of the
      alphabet.


      >
      >
      >> In the end, I decided to stick with the pipe. It may
      >> be a weird choice, but it works for me, and it now
      >> *feels* like part of Moten's identity. It gives it a
      >> unique look on the page at least :) .
      >>
      >
      > I can't blame you. Back in typewriter days I used
      > overstruck slash with impunity! :-)
      >
      >
      Yeah, Moten is definitely pre-Internet :P .
      Well Christophe could always (ab)use 01C0 LATIN LETTER

      > DENTAL CLICK! ;-)
      >
      >
      Ouch! :P
      --
      Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

      http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
      http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
    • George Corley
      On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
      Message 2 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
        On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
        tsela.cg@...> wrote:

        > On 7 March 2013 14:02, A. da Mek <a.da_mek0@...> wrote:
        > > There is one disadvantage of non-letter characters - Google does not
        > > recognize such string as one word.
        > >
        >
        > It's Google's loss, not mine :P .
        >

        Google likely won't care, but people searching for words might run into
        issues.
      • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
        ... Why would *anyone* ever search for Moten words *via Google*? Searching for Moten or Moten language , I d understand, but anything else is just weird.
        Message 3 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
          On 8 March 2013 09:54, George Corley <gacorley@...> wrote:

          > Google likely won't care, but people searching for words might run into
          > issues.
          >

          Why would *anyone* ever search for Moten words *via Google*? Searching for
          "Moten" or "Moten language", I'd understand, but anything else is just
          weird. Especially since Moten morphology means that the shape of a noun in
          the citation form may be very different from the shape of that word in the
          genitive case plural! So a plain Google search (even one that could handle
          the pipe correctly) would most likely not return the results you'd want.

          But really, why would one want to search specific Moten words via Google?
          --
          Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

          http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
          http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
        • BPJ
          ... It s actually more than a peeve in my case. The less I use the mouse the less my shoulder hurts (yes it *always* hurts but it s reducible) I guess I
          Message 4 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
            On 2013-03-08 09:11, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
            > On 7 March 2013 17:49, BPJ<bpj@...> wrote:
            >
            >> >
            >> >Too much mouse-pointing and menu-mucking for my taste.
            >> >
            > Toolbox has lots of keyboard shortcuts :P .

            It's actually more than a peeve in my case. The less I use
            the mouse the less my shoulder hurts (yes it *always* hurts
            but it's reducible) I guess I should get a scrollball in
            front of the keyboard instead -- or a laptop, but my hands
            are too big! :-)

            >
            >
            >> >I'm basically a plain-text guy. Besides I can sort any
            >> >which way me pleases (almost) from within perl:
            >> >
            >> >
            > I'm more a GUI person myself. I like using the keyboard as much as
            > possible, but love to be able to fall back on using the mouse if I forget
            > commands.

            I'm so vimmified that I try to use vim commands in other programs.
            If you see any random letters littered around my emails you'll
            know why!

            >
            > See, that's how rusty my programming skills are: I understand everything
            > you write, but have no idea how I'd go around implementing it myself! I
            > haven't done any serious programming for more than 10 years, and I wasn't
            > that great to begin with...

            And I'm no real programmer! (No formal training etc.)

            >> >Sorry to say but there was a bug which would cause it
            >> >not to compile right on line 11! Also It's quite

            > See, I would never have found that bug. Perl is not really my forte.

            I'ld not have spotted it without syntax highlighting
            either as it was a forward slash instead of a backslash
            in the middle of a regular expression! I realized later
            that actually it would compile but if they intended
            what they say in the associated comment it wouldn't do
            what they intended, which is worse of course!

            >
            >> >Anyway you might probably write something in Ruby
            >> >to get your database into a datastructure. The
            >> >parsing code in Text::Shoebox isn't exactly
            >> >complicated, though it too shows its age.
            >> >
            >> >
            > The parsing isn't what I fear most. It's the next
            > step, converting the data into a useful XeLaTeX
            > file. I'm currently looking at bilingual
            > dictionaries typeset in LaTeX to see how I could
            > create a template. My LaTeX programming skills
            > are*very* rusty, so I'd rather not have to create my
            > own styles :P .

            That's only stage 3 I'm afraid. Going through the data,
            grouping and ordering it correctly and wrapping it in
            LaTeX commands correctly is what I fear most -- more
            exactly how to do it without getting lost in a maze of
            conditionals; 'chunking it down' as someone called it.
            Not only must you divide the whole lexicon into
            entries, you must also divide the entry into the part-of-
            speech/sense number/subentry hierarchy -- at least
            unless everything in each output entry is always going
            to come in exactly the order it stands in the database.
            I'm thinking an object class for each (sub)entryish
            type which can be accessed either as a plain array --
            in the order they come in the database -- or as an
            associative array -- by 'marker' (which I keep thinking
            about as 'tag'), which then in turn would have arrays
            as values since there may be several fields with the
            same tag --, and at the bottom level a field object
            class with a tag and a value property, and then for
            each class a template or method which stringifies it in
            a sensible way. All in the interest of the user only
            needing to worry about the template bit.

            See, already scratching that itch... :-/

            And I have to <del>make money</del><ins>do serious work</ins>!

            /bpj
          • A. da Mek
            ... Maybe you could use the broken one, 00A6 ¦ BROKEN BAR. The palatal sounds are often described as soft , so the yin bar would be more appropriate than the
            Message 5 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
              > In the end, I decided to stick with the pipe.

              Maybe you could use the broken one, 00A6 ¦ BROKEN BAR.
              The palatal sounds are often described as "soft", so the yin bar would be
              more appropriate than the yang one.
            • George Corley
              On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
              Message 6 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
                On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
                tsela.cg@...> wrote:

                > On 8 March 2013 09:54, George Corley <gacorley@...> wrote:
                >
                > > Google likely won't care, but people searching for words might run into
                > > issues.
                > >
                >
                > Why would *anyone* ever search for Moten words *via Google*? Searching for
                > "Moten" or "Moten language", I'd understand, but anything else is just
                > weird. Especially since Moten morphology means that the shape of a noun in
                > the citation form may be very different from the shape of that word in the
                > genitive case plural! So a plain Google search (even one that could handle
                > the pipe correctly) would most likely not return the results you'd want.
                >
                > But really, why would one want to search specific Moten words via Google?
                >

                Someone knows the word, but not what language it comes from, either because
                it was posted somewhere with insufficient information, or they are
                remembering the word but not where they saw it last.

                I'm not trying to get you to change anything. I'm just throwing out my
                ideas as to why conlangers in general would want to be Google-friendly.
                It's not so hard to do, anyway -- Google ignores diacritics, so that
                misspellings of foreign words can still find what the user is after. But I
                respect that you, specifically, have an established orthography that would
                be difficult to change at this point.
              • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                ... Can t type it easily on my keyboard. At least the pipe is readily available without having to do weird contorsions. But I don t understand why we re having
                Message 7 of 19 , Mar 8, 2013
                  On 8 March 2013 12:58, A. da Mek <a.da_mek0@...> wrote:

                  > In the end, I decided to stick with the pipe.
                  >>
                  >
                  > Maybe you could use the broken one, 00A6 ¦ BROKEN BAR.
                  > The palatal sounds are often described as "soft", so the yin bar would be
                  > more appropriate than the yang one.
                  >

                  Can't type it easily on my keyboard. At least the pipe is readily available
                  without having to do weird contorsions.

                  But I don't understand why we're having this discussion. I am *not* going
                  to change Moten's orthography. I was just musing about the time when I
                  considered to do so. That time is past, and no argument is going to make me
                  change my mind on that.

                  On 8 March 2013 18:26, George Corley <gacorley@...> wrote:

                  >
                  > Someone knows the word, but not what language it comes from, either because
                  > it was posted somewhere with insufficient information, or they are
                  > remembering the word but not where they saw it last.
                  >
                  >
                  That's an awfully specific scenario to change an entire orthography for.


                  > I'm not trying to get you to change anything. I'm just throwing out my
                  > ideas as to why conlangers in general would want to be Google-friendly.
                  > It's not so hard to do, anyway -- Google ignores diacritics, so that
                  > misspellings of foreign words can still find what the user is after. But I
                  > respect that you, specifically, have an established orthography that would
                  > be difficult to change at this point.
                  >

                  Thanks :) .
                  --
                  Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

                  http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                  http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                • George Corley
                  On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                  Message 8 of 19 , Mar 9, 2013
                    On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
                    tsela.cg@...> wrote:

                    >
                    > But I don't understand why we're having this discussion. I am *not* going
                    > to change Moten's orthography. I was just musing about the time when I
                    > considered to do so. That time is past, and no argument is going to make me
                    > change my mind on that.
                    >

                    It could be useful to other conlangers whose orthographies are not set in
                    stone yet.


                    > On 8 March 2013 18:26, George Corley <gacorley@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > >
                    > > Someone knows the word, but not what language it comes from, either
                    > because
                    > > it was posted somewhere with insufficient information, or they are
                    > > remembering the word but not where they saw it last.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > That's an awfully specific scenario to change an entire orthography for.
                    >

                    This is only the scenario where optimizing for Google would be important,
                    and it could become quite a common one if you conlang were to become
                    popular for some reason. Seeing as yours is not one of the conlangs riding
                    along the back of a popular book/TV/movie franchise, that's still unlikely.

                    There could be other arguments to be made. Readers will have no idea what
                    the pipe means without reading a pronunciation guide (the only natlang use
                    I can think of is the dental click, which will of course be vanishingly
                    rare). Again, I don't care if you change your orthography, but this could
                    be something for other conlangers to think about.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.