- 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 "landa"
Comment #1:
landa1
|
gleki (Thu Sep 15 17:48:00 2016)
|
it's possible that the curren def. is broken.
.i mi zvati me'o ubu ky noi landa lo pendo be mi
this requires 'me'o ubu ky' (or li) to be understood both as zvati2 (place) and as landa1 (text or number).
moving to landa2 might be one option.
ISO fuhivla is another option.
|
-
Comment #2:
Re: landa1
|
Curtis W Franks (Fri Sep 16 06:59:50 2016)
|
gleki wrote: > it's possible that the curren def. is broken. > > .i mi zvati me'o ubu ky noi landa lo pendo be mi > > this requires 'me'o ubu ky' (or li) to be understood both as zvati2 > (place) and as landa1 (text or number). > > moving to landa2 might be one option. > > ISO fuhivla is another option.
Yeah, I have kind of noticed that oddity but did not know how to phrase it. You did nicely. I think that I would prefer to just move it to landa2. If other ISO gismu have this problem, they should follow suit.
So, it will be "x1 is the country with ISO name x2 of people x3"? That seems fine to me. Maybe a little redundant with gugde, and maybe also with the people terbri (there x3, presently landa2) because ISO countries are defined geopolitical organizations with well-defined and automatically associated populations and territories etc., but it definitely works and provides the functionality and shade of separate meaning that we desire.
|
-
|
|
Comment #3:
Suggestions for a terbri for the standard, and for a note which could be included
|
Curtis W Franks (Fri Sep 16 07:01:04 2016)
|
I suggest adding another terbri at the end of all of these suggestions which describes/specifies which ISO standard is actually being used. It could be just "la ci pa xa xa", or it could be "la ci pa xa xa pi'e pa", or "la ci pa xa xa pi'e pa pi'e .alfas, pi'e re" (this name is a non-precedential mock-up). Heck, it could even be a standard other than from ISO, although I know of none.
It maybe should be noted in the notes (for this and other ISO zi'evla) that the code is not necessarily an actual 'full' or endonymous name for the subject (country in this case). It is not really a normal label or abbreviation; it is a code which is bijectively assigned to the country as a label, but not necessarily in normal usage (in English or the native language). Few people walk around calling their country intentionally by its ISO code (unless it happens to match other common abbreviations or labels).
|
-
Comment #4:
Re: Suggestions for a terbri for the standard, and for a note which could be included
|
gleki (Fri Sep 16 07:05:23 2016)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > I suggest adding another terbri at the end of all of these suggestions > which describes/specifies which ISO standard is actually being used.
Makes sense, e.g. JUDRI semantic frame/megaframe is like that:
x1 is the address/name of object x2 in standard/system x3
> It > could be just "la ci pa xa xa", or it could be "la ci pa > xa xa pi'e pa", or "la ci pa xa xa pi'e pa pi'e > .alfas, pi'e re" (this name is a non-precedential mock-up). Heck, it > could even be a standard other than from ISO, although I know of none.
Colloquial names? :)
|
-
Comment #5:
Re: Suggestions for a terbri for the standard, and for a note which could be included
|
Curtis W Franks (Fri Sep 16 07:17:20 2016)
|
gleki wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > I suggest adding another terbri at the end of all of these suggestions > > which describes/specifies which ISO standard is actually being used. > > > Makes sense, e.g. JUDRI semantic frame/megaframe is like that: > > x1 is the address/name of object x2 in standard/system x3
Nice!
> > It > > could be just "la ci pa xa xa", or it could be "la ci pa > > xa xa pi'e pa", or "la ci pa xa xa pi'e pa pi'e
> > .alfas, pi'e re" (this name is a non-precedential mock-up). Heck, it > > could even be a standard other than from ISO, although I know of none. > > Colloquial names? :)
Uh... I suppose. I personally would not do that and would object in a non-official role (such as a normal conversant, rather than on a prescriptive publication in an official capacity), per the proposed note. (Unless you were suggesting an improvement to the terminology of said note, in which case: Lol, yeah! That is what I was looking for!)
By the way: > it is a code which is bijectively assigned This is actually not true. For example, there are reserved codes; "UK" is not the official code of the UK, but it is reserved by them, while "GB" is the official code assigned to them. Some reserved codes have been unreserved and assigned to another entity or reserved by other entities (although, I think, still on the behalf of the original reserving entity thus far).
|
-
|
|
|
|