WikiDiscuss

webmaster@lojban.org wrote:

>The page BPFK gismu Proposal: kanpe was changed by rlpowell at Wed 09 of Feb, 2005 19:03 UTC
>You can view the page by following this link:
>http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=BPFK+gismu+Proposal%3A+kanpe
>
>You can view a diff back to the previous version by following this link:
>http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-pagehistory.php?page=BPFK+gismu+Proposal%3A+kanpe&diff2=1
>
>The new page content follows below.
>***********************************************************
>
>I propose the creation of a new gismu, kanpe.
>
>! Justification
>
>The notes for pacna suggest its use as "expect", but the keywords, and actual usage, make it clear that pacna is about desire as well as expectation. The normal response to this would be to make a lujvo, but there are only about 3 words that have a place for the odds of something happening, and none of them help. cu'o isn't subjective enough to be useful, and has no rafsi anyways. The best lujvo I could come up with was something like nordjipa'a, which is incredibly long for such a simple concept. Furthermore, we need to settle on whether pacna really can be used to mean "expect" without implying desire, so we're going to have to poke at the gismu list here no matter what we do.
>
>Therefore, I propose that we tweak pacna a tiny bit to make it clear that desire is always implied, and add the gismu kanpe (generated by Arnt and Cowan from the old gismu algorithm) meaning "expect" (without implication of desire).
>
>! Definition
>
>Based almost entirely on pacna.
>
>I don't know how to generate potential rafsi and evaluate them; I think this word is of high utility, though. Could someone else take a look at that issue?
>
>
No opinion at this point on the proposal. If a rafsi is desired, then
that should be factored into the gismu algorithm word selection. I
don't know how and when Arnt and Cowan generated words, but if the
original program was used, there would be a list of multiple
candidates. What are the sources from the 6 languages?

I'll try to run the program on it, and see what comes up (note that the
current weightings are slightly different from those of 1986, and
running with different weightings also gives different answers).

lojbab