Re: Morpheme index project

>Well, if you want the numbers to refer directly to the index, you won't be
>able to assign any numbers until the index is complete, unless you're
>willing to take the chance that you might need to reassign numbers on a
>massive scale.
No, because you have more than 65,000 numbers to
assign to a bunch of some 5,000 morphemes or so.
There will be lots of blank spaces left, as in the
Unicode chart.


>And if any numbers need to be reassigned, you'll need to
>have some way of keeping track of the reassignments and check the date on
>any older documents to see if they're using the old assignments.
Of course, each stage of the index will be labelled a
version number, as done in computer programs. You'll just
need to specify in your text which version you've used.
Then, when the index is completed, a simple computer
program will quickly and errorproofly substitute the
old codes for the definitive ones and their assigned
word.


>I'm
>guessing that you probably want to avoid reassigning numbers. So you'll
>need to spend quite a bit of time organizing the index before any of the
>morphemes are assigned numbers. And while you're doing the organization,
>you'll need some way to refer to the morphemes that can't be confused with
>the real language or the index numbers that will eventually be assigned. I
>think you're underestimating the time and effort that will go into
>organizing the index.
Be sure not. That task of organizing the index is
in fact THE main task for building the index and
thus the essential reason why I'm asking help here.


>That's not what I had in mind at all. You wouldn't use translations of the
>words in different languages, but a unique word to identify each morpheme.
>And the word doesn't have to be English. Of course, if you're discussing
>the language on both an English-speaking list and a Spanish-speaking list,
>that changes things. But you could use Spanish ID's for some morphemes and
>English ones for others, or pick a neutral language.
Or simply assign a number, which is language-neutral
in itself.


>Many choices involved in creating an organized vocabulary list are
>essentially arbitrary. Do you create a category of "trees", with deciduous
>and evergreen trees as subcategories, or do you use the botanical
>classification and have conifers in a separate category from flowering
>plants? You might reasonably want a category of "containers" that can be
>used with the preposition "in". Also, a category of "vehicles" used as the
>object of the verb "ride" would be useful. Since many vehicles are also
>containers, it would be useful for "vehicle" to be a subcategory of
>"container", but then what do you do with vehicles that aren't containers,
>like rafts and barges? You'll have to answer many more questions of that
>nature before you end up with a final scheme for organizing the index.
OF COURSE!!
Only now do you realize that creating a language
implies making lots of to some extent arbitrary
decisions about the semantic dissection of reality
the language will use? I consider building the index
to be the most essential task and aid for devising
the semantic dimension of the language; to me,
that's probably the number 1 reason the index.

Cheers,
Javier

Reply