jbovlaste
a lojban dictionary editing system
User:
Pass:

Home
Get A Printable Dictionary
Search Best Words
Recent Changes
How You Can Help
valsi - All
valsi - Preferred Only
natlang - All
natlang - Preferred Only
Languages
XML Export
user Listing
Report Bugs
Utilities
Status
Help
Admin Request
Create Account
Discussion of "gugypau"
[parent] [root]
Comment #9: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Arnt Richard Johansen (Sun May 31 10:53:16 2009)

I thought that this would be a straightforward change, but social science
is hard. :-/

When we say "second-level/third-level etc. administrative division", do we
mean relative to a sovereign country, or relative to any political entity?

Assume that we have the following two definitions:

gugypau: p1 is a second-level administrative division of country p2=g1.

gugypausle: p1 is a third-level administrative division of country p2=g1.

Further assume that we have the following hierarchical relationships:

* Livingstone County, (la LIVinston.), which is part of Missouri (la
misuris.), which is part of the United States (le mergu'e).
* Oberpfalz (la .Oberpfalts.), which is part of Bavaria (la baiern.),
which is part of Germany (le dotygu'e)

Given the above, which of the following statements are true?

* la LIVinston. gugypau la misuris.
* la LIVinston. gugypau le mergu'e
* la LIVinston. gugypausle la misuris.
* la LIVinston. gugypausle le mergu'e
* la .Oberpfalts. gugypau la baiern.
* la .Oberpfalts. gugypau le dotygu'e
* la .Oberpfalts. gugypausle la baiern.
* la .Oberpfalts. gugypausle le dotygu'e

Does it matter that Germany is a part of the European Union?

Comment #10: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Andrew Piekarski (Mon Jun 1 08:01:55 2009)

arj wrote:
> I thought that this would be a straightforward change, but social
science
> is hard. :-/
>
> When we say "second-level/third-level etc. administrative division", do
we
> mean relative to a sovereign country, or relative to any political
entity?
>
> Assume that we have the following two definitions:
>
> gugypau: p1 is a second-level administrative division of country p2=g1.
>
> gugypausle: p1 is a third-level administrative division of country
p2=g1.
>
> Further assume that we have the following hierarchical relationships:
>
> * Livingstone County, (la LIVinston.), which is part of Missouri (la
> misuris.), which is part of the United States (le mergu'e).
> * Oberpfalz (la .Oberpfalts.), which is part of Bavaria (la baiern.),
> which is part of Germany (le dotygu'e)
>
> Given the above, which of the following statements are true?
>
> * la LIVinston. gugypau la misuris.
> * la LIVinston. gugypau le mergu'e
> * la LIVinston. gugypausle la misuris.
> * la LIVinston. gugypausle le mergu'e
> * la .Oberpfalts. gugypau la baiern.
> * la .Oberpfalts. gugypau le dotygu'e
> * la .Oberpfalts. gugypausle la baiern.
> * la .Oberpfalts. gugypausle le dotygu'e
>
> Does it matter that Germany is a part of the European Union?

I don't really see a problem here. The definitions I have proposed use the
word 'country'. This introduces no more ambiguity into the definition
than is already present in gugde. In 99% of all situations, people are
clear on what is a country and what isn't. The remaining 1% we will never
get rid of because that is an outcome of politics and culture - not
language. Prefacing with 'sovereign' doesn't help, because there are many
interpretations of 'sovereign' (e.g. in the dispute between Canada and
Quebec 'sovereignists').

In English, the USA and Germany are countries; Bavaria, Missouri and the
EU are not. So the only true statements in your list are:

* la LIVinston. gugypausle le mergu'e
* la .Oberpfalts. gugypausle le dotygu'e

Also true are:

* la misuris. gugypau le mergu'e
* la baiern. gugypau le dotygu'e

Comment #11: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Arnt Richard Johansen (Mon Jun 1 09:46:50 2009)

That is a good analysis. Please check on the new definitions.

Comment #12: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Andrew Piekarski (Mon Jun 1 11:24:21 2009)

arj wrote:
> That is a good analysis. Please check on the new definitions.

The changes look OK. I've added some more words to the c.f. and examples
to clear up inevitable misunderstandings as to what 'second-level' means.

Actually, your comments did uncover a problem. We still need a way of
saying 'Livingstone County is a part of Missouri'. Neither gugypau nor
gugypausle will do. For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level administrative
division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.

Comment #13: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Arnt Richard Johansen (Mon Jun 1 12:02:37 2009)

totus wrote:
> For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
> change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level administrative
> division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.

We can't just change a Noralujv entry just because we need a word for a
new meaning.

Comment #14: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Andrew Piekarski (Mon Jun 1 12:38:38 2009)

arj wrote:
> totus wrote:
> > For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
> > change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level administrative
> > division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.
>
> We can't just change a Noralujv entry just because we need a word for a
> new meaning.

The NORALUJV entry doesn't mean anything in English anyway. No matter
what, it needs to be changed. I'm suggesting it is changed (or more
precisley 'clarified') to communicate what probably it was meant to do in
the first place. What would you change it to?

Comment #15: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Arnt Richard Johansen (Mon Jun 1 12:52:24 2009)

totus wrote:
> arj wrote:
> > totus wrote:
> > > For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
> > > change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level administrative
> > > division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.
> >
> > We can't just change a Noralujv entry just because we need a word for
a
> > new meaning.
>
> The NORALUJV entry doesn't mean anything in English anyway. No matter
> what, it needs to be changed. I'm suggesting it is changed (or more
> precisley 'clarified') to communicate what probably it was meant to do
in
> the first place. What would you change it to?

Probably something very close to gugypau. See the keyword, and existing
usage.

Comment #16: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Andrew Piekarski (Mon Jun 1 15:04:27 2009)

arj wrote:
> totus wrote:
> > arj wrote:
> > > totus wrote:
> > > > For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
> > > > change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level
administrative
> > > > division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.
> > >
> > > We can't just change a Noralujv entry just because we need a word
for
> a
> > > new meaning.
> >
> > The NORALUJV entry doesn't mean anything in English anyway. No matter
> > what, it needs to be changed. I'm suggesting it is changed (or more
> > precisley 'clarified') to communicate what probably it was meant to do
> in
> > the first place. What would you change it to?
>
> Probably something very close to gugypau. See the keyword, and existing
> usage.

Right! And isn't 'p1 is a second-level administrative
> > > division of polity p2=j1' very close to the definition of gugypau?
The only difference is that instead of 'country' we have 'polity', so now
we can say 'la LIVinston. jecpau la misuris.'

Comment #17: Re: Redefinition for gugpau?
Andrew Piekarski (Wed Jun 3 09:17:12 2009)

totus wrote:
> arj wrote:
> > totus wrote:
> > > arj wrote:
> > > > totus wrote:
> > > > > For that and other more general cases, I suggest we
> > > > > change the NORALUJV jecpau to 'p1 is a second-level
> administrative
> > > > > division of polity p2=j1. I will do it, unless you do first.
> > > >
> > > > We can't just change a Noralujv entry just because we need a word
> for
> > a
> > > > new meaning.
> > >
> > > The NORALUJV entry doesn't mean anything in English anyway. No
matter
> > > what, it needs to be changed. I'm suggesting it is changed (or more
> > > precisley 'clarified') to communicate what probably it was meant to
do
> > in
> > > the first place. What would you change it to?
> >
> > Probably something very close to gugypau. See the keyword, and
existing
> > usage.
>
> Right! And isn't 'p1 is a second-level administrative
> > > > division of polity p2=j1' very close to the definition of gugypau?
> The only difference is that instead of 'country' we have 'polity', so
now
> we can say 'la LIVinston. jecpau la misuris.'

I look forward to your response to my latest comment (above) on jejcpau.
But in the meantime, I see we have a more serious problem. I'm afraid I
was a little hasty in saying that your changes to gugypau looked OK.

Here are the problems:
1) I don't know how we missed this but our levels are mixed up.
'Second-level administrative division' should be 'First-level
administrative division'. Likewise for gugypausle, 'Third-level
administrative division' should be 'Second-level administrative division'.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_divisions_of_China.
2) Gloss for 'Province' should be qualified by 'First-level administrative
division'. Why? Because provinces can also be second-level as in Italy
and Chile. So for these two countries, and possibly others gugupaysle
would be the one to use.
3) Gloss for 'State'. As above. Even a sixth-level village is a 'part'
of a country.
4) Add third gloss word 'Region; First-level administrative division'.
Without that, we have nothing for Italy, Belgium, Chile and many others.
5) In gugypaysle we have the same issues with the use of 'part' in the
gloss words.

Currently, jbovlaste will accept data for 69 languages.
You are not logged in.

  recent changes jbovlaste main
This is jbovlaste, the lojban dictionary system.
The main code was last changed on Sun Nov 15 18:45:23 PST 2015.
All content is public domain. By submitting content, you agree to place it in the public domain to the fullest extent allowed by local law.
jbovlaste is an official project of the logical language group, and is now headed by Robin Lee Powell.
E-mail him if you have any questions.
care to log in?