There are 18 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Henrik Theiling
1b. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Carsten Becker
1c. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Feaelin Moilar
1d. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Edgard Bikelis
1e. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Arthaey Angosii
1f. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
From: Carsten Becker
2a. Re: Vertical script (was: UTF-8 support in *nix terminals)
From: Carsten Becker
2b. Re: Vertical script
From: Remi Villatel
3a. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
From: Carsten Becker
3b. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
From: Benct Philip Jonsson
3c. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
From: Carsten Becker
3d. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
From: Jean-François Colson
3e. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
From: Isaac Penzev
4a. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
From: Carsten Becker
4b. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
From: Eric Christopherson
4c. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
From: Carsten Becker
5a. collaborative dictionary
From: Dirk Elzinga
5b. Re: collaborative dictionary
From: Chris Bates
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Henrik Theiling" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 3:11 am (PDT)
Hi!
Iain E. Davis writes:
> ----------------------> Carsten Becker wrote:
> > is that my database does not accept sub-entries, so every
>
> I have the same issue, although I don't believe Taraitola has any
> constructions like tapiao, so it is less of a concern.
> > tapiao - to put; to set
> > tapiao dayrin - to save ("to put aside")
> ...[snipped]
>
> Hmm. Since each of those have a distinct meaning, I'd argue that in terms of
> counting, you should count them all. :)
>...
I'd count those, too. Definitely, those are lexicon entries for me.
>...
> > handful. Futhermore, since Ayeri is an agglutinative
> > language, it has lots of suffixes -- these are also counted
> > as words, even the ones that only have a syntactical meaning.
>
> We differ here...as I mentioned to Henrik, I don't list any suffixed forms.
> There are some exceptions where some affixes completely change the meaning,
> but for the most part, it is only the 'original' form. :)
>...
I think Carsten means he counts the suffix *once*, not each suffixed
word form. In Fukhian, which is also agglutinative, I do the same.
Since the suffixed forms are (mostly) regularly derived, and since the
suffix is something you'd most probably count in an isolating lang, I
would say counting them in an agglutinative lang feels right to me.
In an inflected lang, there often is no suffix to count, since the
forms are too irregular to find a meaningly form to put in the
lexicon.
In Þrjótrunn, I do count derivational suffixes and prefixes such as
IIRC -ær < -o:ris, the verb->agent maker or dér- < dis-, the prefix.
**Henrik
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 4:39 am (PDT)
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 19:30:30 -0500, Iain E. Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I hope everyone forgives me for replying to both of you at once. ;)
No, it's quite common here.
>----------------------> Carsten Becker wrote:
>> I'm counting my entries like this: I have a database that is
>> Ayeri -> English at first hand (it's reversible, but then you
>
>What software are you using for your database? I use Excel as a flat file
>"database" and then use a macro to 'generate' a word document in dictionary
>style, if I desire. Which is rare, I prefer to use the spreadsheet for the
>advanced filtering, searching, sorting, etc.
At the moment, I'm using a text file based solution so that each record has
its own .txt file. A PHP script then reads in all those an makes a listing
out of the single files. Of course, it's not possible to reverse or to
search this system. That's the reason why I am currently (and still)
migrating my dictionary into an SQL database that I can query with MySQL
and make human-readable with PHP.
>> Where my German-English dictionary would list all those
>> entries just under "to put", my database makes a new record
>> out of all of these (unfortunately).
>
>It probably would. But your English->German dictionary wouldn't, so you
>have to make some sacrifices somewhere. :).
No, you misunderstood I think. I referred to the English->German dictionary
already, but it's a double volume containing both, English-to-German and
German-to-English. All the constructions using "put" would be listed under
put, but I don't know whether all those combinations are counted as
separate entries.
>> handful. Futhermore, since Ayeri is an agglutinative
>> language, it has lots of suffixes -- these are also counted
>> as words, even the ones that only have a syntactical meaning.
>
>We differ here...as I mentioned to Henrik, I don't list any suffixed forms.
>There are some exceptions where some affixes completely change the meaning,
>but for the most part, it is only the 'original' form. :)
Just to clarify: I only list all the affixes, but not all possible
root+affix combinations. So you've got things like
-ang -- suffix, AGENT case marker
-aris -- suffix, PATIENT case marker
-ing -- adverb, so ...
-iya -- pronoun 3sg, he
>> If you removed those from the list, you'd still have
>> something around 1300 words, maybe a little more or less than that.
>
>Wow.
*feels honoured* ;) Well, if I included all possible affix combinations,
you could multiply that number by ten and triple the result or something,
so basically the same as Henrik said.
Carsten
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Feaelin Moilar" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 6:38 am (PDT)
> At the moment, I'm using a text file based solution so that each record
> has
> its own .txt file. A PHP script then reads in all those an makes a listing
> out of the single files. Of course, it's not possible to reverse or to
> search this system. That's the reason why I am currently (and still)
> migrating my dictionary into an SQL database that I can query with MySQL
> and make human-readable with PHP.
I had a brief flirtation with creating a MySQL database. I got as far as
creating the 'data-entry' page just to see how it would work. I think it
is sitting out there still with a single entry in it. :). Something I
might revive at a later date, but at the time it seemed like too much
work. :)
Hmmm. At the time, I had difficulty with it because MySQL lacked support
for string fields that supported unicode. I've not been looking, but I
imagine more recent versions of MySQL addressed the issue?
> Just to clarify: I only list all the affixes, but not all possible
> root+affix combinations. So you've got things like
...
*nods*. As Henrik pointed out to me, I managed to mis-understand your
meaning. My apologies. :)
Sounds like for the most part, we all use the same general rules of thumb
to measure. Specific syntax and construction of the language of course
confuse the issue...
Iain
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Edgard Bikelis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 11:28 am (PDT)
Hi! Let me join the conversation...
Iain E. Davis wrote:
> ----------------------> Carsten Becker wrote:
>
>> I'm counting my entries like this: I have a database that is
>> Ayeri -> English at first hand (it's reversible, but then you
>>
> What software are you using for your database? I use Excel as a flat file
> "database" and then use a macro to 'generate' a word document in dictionary
> style, if I desire. Which is rare, I prefer to use the spreadsheet for the
> advanced filtering, searching, sorting, etc.
>
I used Excel as well, but I'm using the Openoffice equivalent for the
Unicode compatibility. Then I save it as a CSV file, and open it with
PHP. That part is quite easy. Then I show it through PHP, and I'm now
fighting against inflection ; ). Here is the result so far:
http://ausonia.parnassum.org/dicionario.tudo.php
But I just realized that I can't reverse the entries. I guess I should
have a English dictionary, for instance, and link my Ausonian entries to
the English entries? Ouch.
>
>> haven't got the pronunciation and whatnot for the English
>> words), so the main entry always an Ayeri word. The problem
>> is that my database does not accept sub-entries, so every
>>
>
> I have the same issue, although I don't believe Taraitola has any
> constructions like tapiao, so it is less of a concern.
>
>> tapiao - to put; to set
>> tapiao dayrin - to save ("to put aside")
>>
> ...[snipped]
>
> Hmm. Since each of those have a distinct meaning, I'd argue that in terms of
> counting, you should count them all. :)
>
I would add it as a derivative meaning from the same verb. For instance:
tapiao
1. to put; to set.
2. ~ <i>dayrin</i> - to put aside; to save.
or something like that.
>
>> Where my German-English dictionary would list all those
>> entries just under "to put", my database makes a new record
>> out of all of these (unfortunately).
>>
> It probably would. But your English->German dictionary wouldn't, so you
> have to make some sacrifices somewhere. :). I have something of the same
> problem on the _other_ end. There are words that have distinctions that
> English doesn't make. So the 'english word' column/field can potentially
> have apparent duplicates. It doesn't matter too much to me, since the more
> important field is the 'definition' field. English word is merely for
> creating a 'index' of english-->Taraitola words (no meaning or adornment,
> just a pointer to the Taraitola word).
>
Could you not be more specific in the entries? Or it is a word-to-word
association?
>
>> As for names, I keep them in an extra list, so they are not counted.
>>
> Common
> Which is a reasonable separation. Arguably, when I generate the dictionary,
> mine _are_ separated...into Appendix C: Famous People and Places. In my
> data, though, the only real difference is that they're flagged as 'C'
> entries (for appendix C) instead of 'A' entries.
>
> We did similar things, just different approaches.
>
Both are good ideas. I need to categorize the entries in this way... by
semantical domain. Do anyone know a good list of classes for it?
I would put the names on the main dictionary just for the etymology. Who
were the bearers of the name is a matter for another publication : ). Do
gods count on this restriction?
>
>> expressions usually have their own entries as well. There are
>> not many expressions listed in the dictionary, though, just a
>>
> I have very few expressions and in fact, they are all out of date since I've
> never revisited them since I completely revised the phonology. They are
> stored completely separately, but they may pre-date the spreadsheet...
>
And these expressions are entries on the dictionary, or 'sub-meanings'
on the main word? for instance:
bhâma:
1. that which is said, fame.
2. ~ ambrotós - the immortal fame, used in poetry &c &c
>
>> handful. Futhermore, since Ayeri is an agglutinative
>> language, it has lots of suffixes -- these are also counted
>> as words, even the ones that only have a syntactical meaning.
>>
>
> We differ here...as I mentioned to Henrik, I don't list any suffixed forms.
> There are some exceptions where some affixes completely change the meaning,
> but for the most part, it is only the 'original' form. :)
>
>
>> If you removed those from the list, you'd still have
>> something around 1300 words, maybe a little more or less than that.
>>
>
> Wow.
>
Someday, hopefully, I will pass the thousand frontier ; ).
> Our discussion prompted me to add a 'statistics' worksheet, just to see what
> I had. I won't bore you with the full details, but a brief look:
>
> 916 Entries, 162 of which are "Names"/"Proper Nouns". I need to dig in and
> work my way through the swadesh list and all the weekly vocabs I haven't
> done yet...:)
>
> Feaelin
>
>
What about giving for each word/entry an example phrase? Specially for
verbs, it would be useful for showing the prepositions... the case of
the object, and for exercising the fluency, too...
Edgard Bikelis.
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Arthaey Angosii" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 12:20 pm (PDT)
Emaelivpeith Feaelin Moilar:
> Hmmm. At the time, I had difficulty with it because MySQL lacked support
> for string fields that supported unicode. I've not been looking, but I
> imagine more recent versions of MySQL addressed the issue?
Since MySQL version 4.1:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/charset-unicode.html
--
AA
http://conlang.arthaey.com
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: Lexicon counting (was: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1...)
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 10:30 pm (PDT)
Hi,
Sorry that this answer comes only so late, but I exceeded my
posting limit yesterday.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 08:24:34 -0500, Feaelin Moilar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hmmm. At the time, I had difficulty with it because MySQL lacked support
>for string fields that supported unicode. I've not been looking, but I
>imagine more recent versions of MySQL addressed the issue?
Unfortunately, MySQL 5 addresses this issue only half-heartedly as it
seems to me, I don't know which version I have exactly, but in my
version at least Unicode does not really seem to work. The system
somehow can only handle iso-8859-1 and changes my UTF-8 characters to
_ð_ and such. When giving out the word list in HTML, I can specify
that this should be reencoded to UTF-8 with HTML's meta-tags. On the
other hand, it may be just because I have WinXP and not Linux.
Yours,
Carsten
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Vertical script (was: UTF-8 support in *nix terminals)
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 4:57 am (PDT)
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 17:17:05 -0700, H. S. Teoh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Just for fun I also drew an ornamental syllabary:
>> http://home.tele2.fr/mxls/images/bli/syllabary.png
>
>Wow, this is nice.
>
>
>> It's name is /BlitayI/ [b4itaHi]:
>> http://home.tele2.fr/mxls/images/bli/blitayi.png
>>
>> In action, it looks like this:
>> http://home.tele2.fr/mxls/images/bli/story.png
*Very* nice :-) I only cannot write my name in because it lacks n, m and
ng. Why? Is the system extendable? Could one use diagraphs to write nasal
(and other) consonants? Have you thought about sending this to Omniglot?
Yours,
Carsten
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Vertical script
Posted by: "Remi Villatel" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 10:23 am (PDT)
On Tuesday 05 September 2006 13:38, Carsten Becker wrote:
> >> Just for fun I also drew an ornamental syllabary:
> >> http://home.tele2.fr/mxls/images/bli/syllabary.png
[---CUT---]
> *Very* nice :-) I only cannot write my name in because it lacks n, m and
> ng. Why?
That's because /BlitayI/ is meant to write Shaquelingua, not English nor any
earthling language.
> Is the system extendable? Could one use diagraphs to write nasal (and
> other) consonants?
All the shaquean consonants are here, why should I need more?
The rules to transcribe names aren't definitive (nor written) yet but I
think the way a Shaquean would mispronounce your first name would be:
KarhçÄY [k_hax.C3H]
KaraçtÄY [k_haXa.Ct3H] (If you insist on keeping all your consonants.)
(I estimated your pronunciation of "Carsten" not too far from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
since you used to have a german email.)
> Have you thought about sending this to Omniglot?
Of course, I'd like to see all the shaquean scripts on Omniglot but I first
need to fix the grammar so that the sentences in the example aren't too
incorrect... and to have something pretty to link from Omniglot.
ja tusi tÅ klava, [ja: tusi tO k4ava] (There will be another day.)
--
==================
Remi Villatel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
==================
Messages in this topic (30)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 5:00 am (PDT)
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 06:54:48 +0200, Jean-François Colson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>For Win XP, there're the TrueType fonts Century Schoolbook (without the
>"L"), Times New Roman and, for Russian only, Arial.
>Here is a sample: http://users.skynet.be/fa597525/Cyritalic.jpg
As I understand it, Benct is searching for a Cyrillic cursive font with
connected letters and all, not just for an italic font that uses cursive
shapes (m, u, mirrored-s etc.). Benct?
Yours,
Carsten
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
Posted by: "Benct Philip Jonsson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 6:20 am (PDT)
Carsten Becker skrev:
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 06:54:48 +0200, Jean-François Colson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> For Win XP, there're the TrueType fonts Century Schoolbook (without the
>> "L"), Times New Roman and, for Russian only, Arial.
>> Here is a sample: http://users.skynet.be/fa597525/Cyritalic.jpg
>
> As I understand it, Benct is searching for a Cyrillic cursive font with
> connected letters and all, not just for an italic font that uses cursive
> shapes (m, u, mirrored-s etc.). Benct?
Yes that's right. Russian handwriting looks subtly different from
printed italics in a number of ways -- e.g. the lowercase |v| looks
like a Roman cursive handwritten |b| (with a looped ascender of course),
while |b| looks similar to a Roman |d| and |d| looks like a Roman
cursive |g|. An italic font that has these features might do,
and I think Bodoni is one, but I don't have it.
The Russian typefoundry paratype.com has some good ones,
but they are USD 25 a piece...
> Yours,
> Carsten
>
>
>
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
"Maybe" is a strange word. When mum or dad says it
it means "yes", but when my big brothers say it it
means "no"!
(Philip Jonsson jr, age 7)
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 6:37 am (PDT)
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 13:37:21 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An italic font that has these features might do,
>and I think Bodoni is one, but I don't have it.
I've got Bauer Bodoni floating around somewhere on my PC, I'll have a look
at that when I'm at home again -- I'm writing this at work in fact. Bad
boy, me :-P
Yours,
Carsten
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
Posted by: "Jean-François Colson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 9:36 am (PDT)
On Tuesday, September 05, 2006 1:37 PM CEST, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> Carsten Becker skrev:
> > On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 06:54:48 +0200, Jean-François Colson
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> For Win XP, there're the TrueType fonts Century Schoolbook (without the
> >> "L"), Times New Roman and, for Russian only, Arial.
> >> Here is a sample: http://users.skynet.be/fa597525/Cyritalic.jpg
> >
> > As I understand it, Benct is searching for a Cyrillic cursive font with
> > connected letters and all, not just for an italic font that uses cursive
> > shapes (m, u, mirrored-s etc.). Benct?
>
> Yes that's right. Russian handwriting looks subtly different from
> printed italics in a number of ways -- e.g. the lowercase |v| looks
> like a Roman cursive handwritten |b| (with a looped ascender of course),
> while |b| looks similar to a Roman |d| and |d| looks like a Roman
> cursive |g|.
Something like this?
http://users.skynet.be/fa597525/Alphabet%20russe.jpg
(I found this in an old French dictionary.)
> An italic font that has these features might do,
> and I think Bodoni is one, but I don't have it.
> The Russian typefoundry paratype.com has some good ones,
> but they are USD 25 a piece...
Just a little expensive. How do you say "cursive", "handwring" and "font" in
Russian?
>
> > Yours,
> > Carsten
> >
> >
> >
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: TECH: Russian handwriting font
Posted by: "Isaac Penzev" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 12:12 pm (PDT)
Jean-Francois Colson girs'epset':
| How do you say "cursive", "handwring" and "font" in
| Russian?
"ËÕÒÓÉ×", "ÒÕËÏÐÉÓÎÙÊ" and "ÛÒÉÆÔ".
I think Pavel's advice to look at
http://www.win-design.ru/o_fonts_ruk_1.shtml is good. Especially ARS.TTF
-- Yitzik
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 6:41 am (PDT)
Hallo,
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 00:19:25 +0200, Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Interesting. Did you have a particular reason to decide to reverse
>the typical order for compounding? All the languages in which I know
>the word 'werewolf' compound it as 'man-wolf'.
>
>I always intuitionally thought 'wolf-man' would be more sensible, so I
>wonder whether you thought the same.
I do. But then, Ayeri's compounding is *mostly* right-branching because I
decided so once. I don't know whether it's naturalistic.
Carsten
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 8:29 pm (PDT)
On Sep 4, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Carsten Becker writes:
>> ...
>>>> 2. werewolf / lycanthrope of some variety
>>
>> ayvengaryo (lit. "wolf-man")
>> ...
>
> Interesting. Did you have a particular reason to decide to reverse
> the typical order for compounding? All the languages in which I know
> the word 'werewolf' compound it as 'man-wolf'.
There is an English word 'wolfman' (or 'wolf man') also. I'm not
sure of its exact semantics or distribution, but it seems to occur
most commonly in the context of old monster movies (including the one
called "The Wolf Man").
>
> I always intuitionally thought 'wolf-man' would be more sensible, so I
> wonder whether you thought the same.
It's an interesting question -- is a werewolf a (wolf-like) type of
human, or a (human-like) type of wolf?
>
> When translating it a few days ago, I still sticked to the order all
> the other languages I know use.
>
> **Henrik
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Weekly Vocab #1.1.1 (repost #1)
Posted by: "Carsten Becker" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 10:27 pm (PDT)
Hi,
From: "Roger Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:31 AM
>> Carsten Becker writes:
>> >...
>> > >> 2. werewolf / lycanthrope of some variety
>> >
>> > ayvengaryo (lit. "wolf-man")
>> >...
>
> Hmm, OK-- the Kash counterpart would be _ticandi_ [ti'tSandi] 'moon-cousin'
> ult. < tiça 'cousin' + tandi 'moon'. It is believed that some people turn
> into one of these ravening beasts when _both_ moons are full. In Kash
> folklore they are considered to be suffering from some ancient curse, but
> it's a pitiable condition, and the right kind words/thoughts might subdue a
> ticandi and avert the danger. In Gwr folklore, of course, they are much
> feared-- one more reason not to go into the forest.
In fact, I didn't put that word into my dictionary when I
updated it yesterday. I haven't yet figured out about Ayeri
monsters and mythical creatures. Alas, another thing I have
not thought about yet. It would be interesting to know
whether other nat-cultures have an equivalent to were-wolves
and what that would be and how you become such a monster
according to stories.
Carsten
--
"Miranayam kepauarà naranoaris." (Kalvin nay Hobbes)
Tenena, Ravikan 19, 2315 ya 04:27:37 pd
Messages in this topic (31)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. collaborative dictionary
Posted by: "Dirk Elzinga" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue Sep 5, 2006 6:36 pm (PDT)
Hi, everyone.
The semester is starting for me tomorrow, and I will be teaching a field
methods course for the first time (yikes!). As part of their evaluation, the
students will be preparing a grammatical sketch and dictionary of the
language (we're looking at Farsi). I know how I want to handle the
grammatical sketch--everyone will write up and contribute a portion of the
grammar (phonology, nouns, verbs, simple sentences, etc), but I'd like the
dictionary to be collaborative, and I was wondering if a wiki would be a
good way to go about this. I have never set up a wiki (or even contributed
to one!), but I am given to understand that it's not too difficult to get
going or to use.
So my question to you all is Will this work? What are the best software
packages for doing this sort of thing? Can I make the wiki secure so that
only course participants can contribute? Are there better ways of making a
collaborative dictionary? I'd like to hear what you think.
Thanks.
Dirk
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: collaborative dictionary
Posted by: "Chris Bates" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Sep 6, 2006 12:09 am (PDT)
> So my question to you all is Will this work? What are the best
> software packages for doing this sort of thing? Can I make the wiki
> secure so that only course participants can contribute? Are there
> better ways of making a collaborative dictionary? I'd like to hear
> what you think.
You can make it secure enough, but the solution seems far from ideal.
IIRC there is a multiuser dictionary program called phpDictionary or
similar that you might investigate.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
