Re: A question regarding dictionary entries

Roger Mills wrote:
>Sylvia Sotomayor wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am redesigning my dictinary for Kelen (yet again), and I am planning
>> on having short glosses (one word, maybe two) for each stem or base
>> word, and also longer definitions for each fully formed and inflected
>> word. My question: given that Kelen has a base 8 counting system,
>> should I gloss 'āllōr' as 32 or 40? It has the functional equivalent
>> of 40 in the language, being 8x4, but refers to 32 things.
>>
>I'd suggest you insert an explanatory comment, like:
>"āllōr  forty (base 8 = 32 base 10)"
>That will prevent IMO any confusion/mistakes on the part of the reader.
I OTOH don't much like calling your number "forty".  I find it handy to
always have "ten" around to mean 'the number of dots in ..........' even
when "10" can't be relied upon to play that role.  And besides,
"functional
equivalency" between bases is hardly cut and dried -- who says the
base-ten
equivalent of 32_8 isn't 50, also being half the base squared?
(Probably
something in the Kelen system says so, actually.  But still.)

I'd gloss your a:llo:r simply as '4*8' or '8x4' or some other variant,
inserting a comment that this 8 is the base if you deem it necessary.

Alex
--
  Alex Fink
  a4pq1injbok_0@fastmail.fm

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own

Reply