There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Semi-Taxonomic Lexicon Building
From: Roman Rausch
2a. OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Gary Shannon
2b. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Lee
2c. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Gary Shannon
2d. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Lee
2e. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Karen Badham
2f. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Gary Shannon
2g. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Lee
2h. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Herman Miller
2i. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Ryan Dobie-Watt
2j. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
3a. Re: Murray Gell-Mann
From: Daniel Nielsen
4. The Results are In!
From: Donald Boozer
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Semi-Taxonomic Lexicon Building
Posted by: "Roman Rausch" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:19 am ((PDT))
>The idea behind a philosophical language is that nobody would ever
>need a dictionary because the word tells you what it means. The
>attempts I've seen have some pretty arbitrary and obscure ideas about
>how people are supposed to interpret the meaning of the "atoms". I
>pull apart a word and come to the conclusion it must mean "fur coat",
>but no, it's supposed to be "polar bear".
I also think that a completely philosophical (my own term is still
'deductive') language is exaggerated. But our view of the world has
drastically changed over the last centuries, although we are basically stuck
with the language our ancestors left us without the possibility of changing
it quickly enough. Conlangs give us this possibilty of change, so it is not
surprising that they usually take a more deductive approach (and therefore
tend to be agglutinative, I believe).
I aim my own language to be just a bit more deductive than natural ones.
>Certainly. Many of Dalgarno's and Wilkins's classifications are
>now utterly obsolete (one of them, I think it was Wilkins,
>classified comets as fire phenomena; today they know that they
>are made of ice, as everyone knows a very fiery substance indeed :)
Does it really matter what it is by some physical or chemical, rather than
psychological classification? For example, glass is physically in a
metastable state between a liquid and a solid, but it's a solid for all
everyday life's purposes and nothing will change that.
A meteor, at least, appears very fiery, although I would rather classify it
as a projectile or something.
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:34 pm ((PDT))
I was trying to make some sense out of the online 1911 Roget's
thesaurus from Gutenberg. It's just a mess! A hodgepodge of categories
that seldom make a lot of sense, and a hierarchy that's broken and
scattered. (Not to mention incredibly parochial. Under the heading
"Pseudo-Revelation" we find "the Koran, Vedas, Upanishads, Book of
Mormon. Buddha; Zoroaster, Confucius, Mohammed.") Apparently to Roget
all non-Christians are heathens.
Well, anyway, just for fun I decided to see how difficult it would be
to build a brand new hierarchy from scratch. A complete hierarchy of
concepts is a monstrous undertaking, of course, so I settled on a
small subset as a test of concept. My headword was "motion". Armed
only with a hardcopy dictionary and thesaurus it took me not quite
three hours to gather 279 motion words and arrange them into a
hierarchy. I'm sure it's no where near complete, and probably not even
correct, but it was an interesting exercise. It makes me think a
hierarchical word list for use as a conlanging resource is a feasible
project.
Without further ado, then, here is my hierarchy of motion,an
incomplete work in progress:
1. [n] motion
1.1. Traits of motion
1.1.1. [n] speed
1.1.1.1. [adj] fast
1.1.1.1.1. [v] rush, hurry
1.1.1.1.2. [v] charge
1.1.1.1.3. [v] dash
1.1.1.2. [adj] slow
1.1.1.2.1. [v] poke, dawdle
1.1.1.2.2. [v] straggle
1.1.1.3. [n] acceleration
1.1.1.3.1. [v] accelerate, speed up
1.1.1.3.2. [v] decelerate, slow down
1.1.1.4. [adj] regular, constant
1.1.1.4.1. [adj] smooth
1.1.1.5. [adj] irregular
1.1.1.5.1. [adj] abrupt
1.1.1.5.1.1. [adj] bumpy
1.1.1.5.1.2. [adj] choppy
1.1.1.5.1.3. [v] lurch
1.1.1.5.1.3.1. [adj] lurching
1.1.1.5.2. [adj] gradual
1.1.1.5.2.1. [adj] rolling
1.1.1.5.2.2. [v] sway
1.1.1.5.2.2.1. [adj] swaying
1.1.2. [n] direction
1.1.2.1. [prep] toward (direction)
1.1.2.1.1. [dir] ahead
1.1.2.1.1.1. [v] advance
1.1.2.1.1.1.1. [n] advancement
1.1.2.1.1.1.2. [v] proceed
1.1.2.1.2. [dir] back
1.1.2.1.2.1. [v] return (to origin)
1.1.2.1.2.2. [v] retreat (from location)
1.1.2.1.2.2.1 [n] retreat
1.1.2.1.3. [dir] left
1.1.2.1.4. [dir] right
1.1.2.1.4. [dir] compass points
1.1.2.1.4.1. [dir] north
1.1.2.1.4.2. [dir] south
1.1.2.1.4.3. [dir] east
1.1.2.1.4.4. [dir] west
1.1.2.1.5. [dir] up
1.1.2.1.5.1. [v] ascend
1.1.2.1.5.2. [v] levitate
1.1.2.1.6. [dir] down
1.1.2.1.6.1. [v] descend
1.1.2.1.7. [dir] circular
1.1.2.1.7.1. [adj] direction
1.1.2.1.7.1.1. [adj] clockwise
1.1.2.1.7.1.2. [adj] counterclockwise
1.1.2.1.7.2. [v] rotate
1.1.2.1.7.3. [v] revolve
1.1.2.1.7.3.1. [n] revolution
1.1.2.1.7.3. [v] spin
1.1.2.1.7.4. [v] turn
1.1.2.1.7.5. [v] twist
1.1.2.1.7.6. [v] spiral
1.1.2.1.7.7. [v] loop
1.1.2.1.7.8. [v] roll
1.1.2.1.8. [adj] pendular
1.1.2.1.8.1. [n] pendulum
1.1.2.1.8.1.1. [v] swing
1.1.2.1.8.1.2. [n] swing
1.1.2.1.8.2. [v] sway
1.1.2.1.8.3. [v] oscillate
1.1.2.1.8.3.1. [n] oscillation
1.1.2.1.8.4. [v] hang
1.1.2.1.8.4.1. [v] dangle
1.1.3. [n] origin
1.1.3.1. [prep] away (from location)
1.1.3.1.1. [v] leave
1.1.3.1.1.1. [v] flee
1.1.3.2. [prep] from (origin)
1.1.3.2.1. [v] depart (location)
1.1.3.2.1.1. [n] departure
1.1.3.3. [prep] out of (enclosure)
1.1.3.3.1. [v] exit
1.1.3.3.1.1. [n] exit (naming the act)
1.1.3.3.2. [v] leave
1.1.4. [n] destination
1.1.4.1. [prep] to (location)
1.1.4.1.1. [v] go
1.1.4.1.2. [v] arrive at (location)
1.1.4.1.2.1. [n] arrival
1.1.4.2. [prep] toward (location)
1.1.4.2.1. [v] approach (location)
1.1.4.2.1.1. [n] approach
1.1.4.3. [prep] into (enclosure)
1.1.4.3.1. [v] enter
1.1.5. [n] route, path, course
1.1.5.1. [prep] across
1.1.5.1.1. [v] cross
1.1.5.2. [prep] over
1.1.5.3. [prep] under (object)
1.1.5.4. [prep] underground
1.1.5.4.1. [v] tunnel
1.1.5.5. [prep] through
1.1.5.6. [prep] around (circling)
1.1.5.6.1. [v] circumnavigate
1.1.5.7. [prep] around (avoiding)
1.1.5.7.1. [v] avoid
1.1.5.7.2. [v] skirt
1.1.5.8. [prep] alongside
1.1.5.9. Traits of path or route
1.1.5.9.1. [adj] direct, straight
1.1.5.9.2. [adj] meandering
1.1.5.9.2.1. [v] meander
1.1.5.9.3. [adj] uncertain
1.1.5.9.3.1. [v] wander
1.1.5.9.3.2. [v] drift
1.1.5.9.4. [adj] convoluted
1.1.6. Other
1.1.6.1. [prep] with (another)
1.1.6.1.1. [v] accompany
1.1.6.3. [prep] following (another)
1.1.6.3.1. [v] follow
1.1.6.3.1.1. [v] track
1.1.6.3.2. [v] pursue
1.1.6.3.2.1. [v] chase
1.1.6.4. [prep] following, along, on, upon (road, track or path)
1.1.6.5. [prep] behind (another)
1.1.6.5.1. [v] trail [behind]
1.1.6.6. [prep] in front of (another)
1.1.6.6.1. [v] lead
1.1.6.7. [prep] upon (object)
1.1.6.7.1. [v] climb
1.1.6.7.2. [v] scale
1.1.6.7.3. [v] mount
1.1.6.8. [prep] past (another)
1.1.6.8.1. [v] pass
1.1.6.8.2. [v] overtake
1.1.6.9. [prep] versus, against (another)
1.1.6.9.1. [v] race
1.1.6.9.1.1. [n] race
1.1.6.10. [n] relocation
1.1.9.10.1. [v] relocate
1.1.9.10.2. [v] migrate
1.1.9.10.2.1. [n] migration
1.1.9.11. [n] agitation
1.1.9.11.1. [v] agitate
1.1.9.11.2. [v] shake
1.1.9.12. [v] navigate
1.1.9.12.1. [v] maneuver
1.1.9.12.2. [v] negotiate
1.1.9.13. [v] rearrange
1.1.9.13.1. [v] shift
1.1.9.13.2. [v] sort, arrange
1.1.9.13.3. [v] mix, jumble
1.1.7. [n] mode
1.1.7.1. [n] ambulation
1.1.7.1.1. [v] walk
1.1.7.1.2. [v]stroll
1.1.7.1.3. [v] run
1.1.7.1.3.1. [n] runner
1.1.7.1.3.2. [v] jog
1.1.7.1.3.2.1. [n] jogger
1.1.7.1.3.3. [v] trot
1.1.7.1.3.4. [v] gallop
1.1.7.1.4. [v] hike
1.1.7.1.4.1. [n] hiker
1.1.7.1.5. [v] trudge
1.1.7.1.6. [v] jump
1.1.7.1.6.1. [v] leap
1.1.7.1.6.2. [v] hop
1.1.7.1.6.3. [v] hurdle
1.1.7.1.7. [v] fly (unaided, as a bird)
1.1.7.1.8. [v] stumble
1.1.7.1.9. [v] crawl
1.1.7.1.10. [v] creep
1.1.7.1.11. [v] slither
1.1.7.1.12. [adj] rhythmic motion
1.1.7.1.12.1. [v] dance
1.1.7.1.12.2. [v] cavort
1.1.7.1.12.3. [v] sashay
1.1.7.1.12.4. [v] promenade
1.1.7.1.12.4.1. [v] promenade
1.1.7.1.12.5. [v] prance
1.1.7.1.12.6. [v] march
1.1.7.1.12.6.1. [n] march
1.1.7.1.12.7. [v] parade
1.1.7.1.12.7.1. [n] parade
1.1.7.1.12.7.2. [n] procession
1.1.7.1.12.8. [v] skip
1.1.7.2. [n] vehicle
1.1.7.2.1. [v] ride (on)
1.1.7.2.1.1. [v] cycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.1. [n] bicycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.2. [n] motorcycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.3. [n] cyclist
1.1.7.2.1.2. [n] horse, or other animal
1.1.7.2.1.2.1. [n] equestrian
1.1.7.2.1.2.2. [n] rider
1.1.7.2.1.3. [n] scooter
1.1.7.2.2. [v] ride (in)
1.1.7.2.3.1. [n] passenger
1.1.7.2.3. [v] drive
1.1.7.2.3.1. [n] driver
1.1.7.2.4. [v] pilot
1.1.7.2.4.1. [n] pilot
1.1.7.2.5. [v] fly
1.1.7.2.5.1. [n] flyer
1.1.8. [v] move another
1.1.8.1. [v] carry
1.1.8.2. [v] transport
1.1.8.3. [v] move
1.1.8.3.1. [v] push
1.1.8.3.2. [v] pull
1.1.8.3.3. [v] lift, raise
1.1.8.3.3.1. [v] elevate
1.1.8.3.3.2. [v] hoist
1.1.8.3.3.2.1. [n] hoist
1.1.8.3.3.3. [v] jack
1.1.8.3.3.3.1. [n] jack
1.1.8.3.4. [v] throw
1.1.8.3.4.1. [v] toss
1.1.8.3.4.2. [v] pitch
1.1.8.3.4.3. [v] lob
1.1.8.3.4.4. [v] hurtle
1.1.8.3.4.5. [v] heave
1.1.8.3.5. [v] put
1.1.8.3.6. [v] take
1.1.8.3.7. [v] remove
1.1.8.3.8. [v] transfer
1.1.8.4. Allow to move
1.1.8.4.1. [v] release
1.1.8.4.1.1. [v] drop
1.1.8.5. Cause to move
1.1.8.5.1 [v] send
1.1.8.6. Impel motion
1.1.8.6.1 [v] attract
1.1.8.6.1.1. [n] attraction
1.1.8.6.1.2. [n] attractant
1.1.8.6.2 [v] repel
1.1.8.6.2.1. [n] repulsion
1.1.8.6.2.2. [n] repellant
1.1.8.6.3. [v] rouse, arouse
1.1.9. [v] move (implied or unspecified cause)
1.1.9.1. [v] rise
1.1.9.2. [v] fall
1.1.9.3. [v] float
1.1.9.4. [v] sink
1.1.10. Motion of a fluid
1.1.10.1. [v] flow
1.1.10.2. [v] circulate
1.1.10.3. [v] splash
1.1.10.4. [v] oscillate
1.1.10.4.1. [n] wave
1.1.10.4.1.1. [n] breaker
1.1.10.4.1.2. [n] tsunami
1.1.10.4.1.3. [n] tidal wave
1.1.10.4.1.4. [n] wake (of a boat)
1.1.10.4.2. [v] slosh
1.1.10.5. [v] trickle
1.1.10.6. [v] drip
1.1.10.7. [v] spray
1.1.10.8. [v] squirt
1.1.10.9. [v] stir
1.1.10.10. [v] gush
1.1.10.11. [v] bubble
1.1.11. Change of posture
1.1.11.1. [v] stand
1.1.11.2. [v] sit
1.1.11.3. [v] lie
1.1.11.3.1. [v] recline
1.1.11.4. [v] kneel
1.1.11.4.1. [v] genuflect
1.1.11.5. [v] bow
1.1.11.6. [v] curtsy
1.1.12. Change of motion
1.1.12.1. [v] start
1.1.12.1.1. [v] embark
1.1.12.2. [v] stop
1.1.12.2.1. [v] halt
1.1.12.2.2. [v] yield
1.1.12.3. [v] turn
1.1.12.3.1. [v] deflect
1.1.12.3.2. [v] reflect
1.1.12.3.3. [v] rebound
1.1.12.3.4. [v] bounce
1.1.12.3.5. [v] detour
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:49 pm ((PDT))
I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's 1911
Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they had
actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a machine to
figure it out!)
Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included, but I
can do without for now.
Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and move
things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some categories and
add others.
Lee
--- On Tue, 7/27/10, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Gary Shannon <[email protected]>
Subject: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2010, 2:32 PM
I was trying to make some sense out of the online 1911 Roget's
thesaurus from Gutenberg. It's just a mess! A hodgepodge of categories
that seldom make a lot of sense, and a hierarchy that's broken and
scattered. (Not to mention incredibly parochial. Under the heading
"Pseudo-Revelation" we find "the Koran, Vedas, Upanishads, Book of
Mormon. Buddha; Zoroaster, Confucius, Mohammed.") Apparently to Roget
all non-Christians are heathens.
Well, anyway, just for fun I decided to see how difficult it would be
to build a brand new hierarchy from scratch. A complete hierarchy of
concepts is a monstrous undertaking, of course, so I settled on a
small subset as a test of concept. My headword was "motion". Armed
only with a hardcopy dictionary and thesaurus it took me not quite
three hours to gather 279 motion words and arrange them into a
hierarchy. I'm sure it's no where near complete, and probably not even
correct, but it was an interesting exercise. It makes me think a
hierarchical word list for use as a conlanging resource is a feasible
project.
Without further ado, then, here is my hierarchy of motion,an
incomplete work in progress:
1. [n] motion
1.1. Traits of motion
1.1.1. [n] speed
1.1.1.1. [adj] fast
1.1.1.1.1. [v] rush, hurry
1.1.1.1.2. [v] charge
1.1.1.1.3. [v] dash
1.1.1.2. [adj] slow
1.1.1.2.1. [v] poke, dawdle
1.1.1.2.2. [v] straggle
1.1.1.3. [n] acceleration
1.1.1.3.1. [v] accelerate, speed up
1.1.1.3.2. [v] decelerate, slow down
1.1.1.4. [adj] regular, constant
1.1.1.4.1. [adj] smooth
1.1.1.5. [adj] irregular
1.1.1.5.1. [adj] abrupt
1.1.1.5.1.1. [adj] bumpy
1.1.1.5.1.2. [adj] choppy
1.1.1.5.1.3. [v] lurch
1.1.1.5.1.3.1. [adj] lurching
1.1.1.5.2. [adj] gradual
1.1.1.5.2.1. [adj] rolling
1.1.1.5.2.2. [v] sway
1.1.1.5.2.2.1. [adj] swaying
1.1.2. [n] direction
1.1.2.1. [prep] toward (direction)
1.1.2.1.1. [dir] ahead
1.1.2.1.1.1. [v] advance
1.1.2.1.1.1.1. [n] advancement
1.1.2.1.1.1.2. [v] proceed
1.1.2.1.2. [dir] back
1.1.2.1.2.1. [v] return (to origin)
1.1.2.1.2.2. [v] retreat (from location)
1.1.2.1.2.2.1 [n] retreat
1.1.2.1.3. [dir] left
1.1.2.1.4. [dir] right
1.1.2.1.4. [dir] compass points
1.1.2.1.4.1. [dir] north
1.1.2.1.4.2. [dir] south
1.1.2.1.4.3. [dir] east
1.1.2.1.4.4. [dir] west
1.1.2.1.5. [dir] up
1.1.2.1.5.1. [v] ascend
1.1.2.1.5.2. [v] levitate
1.1.2.1.6. [dir] down
1.1.2.1.6.1. [v] descend
1.1.2.1.7. [dir] circular
1.1.2.1.7.1. [adj] direction
1.1.2.1.7.1.1. [adj] clockwise
1.1.2.1.7.1.2. [adj] counterclockwise
1.1.2.1.7.2. [v] rotate
1.1.2.1.7.3. [v] revolve
1.1.2.1.7.3.1. [n] revolution
1.1.2.1.7.3. [v] spin
1.1.2.1.7.4. [v] turn
1.1.2.1.7.5. [v] twist
1.1.2.1.7.6. [v] spiral
1.1.2.1.7.7. [v] loop
1.1.2.1.7.8. [v] roll
1.1.2.1.8. [adj] pendular
1.1.2.1.8.1. [n] pendulum
1.1.2.1.8.1.1. [v] swing
1.1.2.1.8.1.2. [n] swing
1.1.2.1.8.2. [v] sway
1.1.2.1.8.3. [v] oscillate
1.1.2.1.8.3.1. [n] oscillation
1.1.2.1.8.4. [v] hang
1.1.2.1.8.4.1. [v] dangle
1.1.3. [n] origin
1.1.3.1. [prep] away (from location)
1.1.3.1.1. [v] leave
1.1.3.1.1.1. [v] flee
1.1.3.2. [prep] from (origin)
1.1.3.2.1. [v] depart (location)
1.1.3.2.1.1. [n] departure
1.1.3.3. [prep] out of (enclosure)
1.1.3.3.1. [v] exit
1.1.3.3.1.1. [n] exit (naming the act)
1.1.3.3.2. [v] leave
1.1.4. [n] destination
1.1.4.1. [prep] to (location)
1.1.4.1.1. [v] go
1.1.4.1.2. [v] arrive at (location)
1.1.4.1.2.1. [n] arrival
1.1.4.2. [prep] toward (location)
1.1.4.2.1. [v] approach (location)
1.1.4.2.1.1. [n] approach
1.1.4.3. [prep] into (enclosure)
1.1.4.3.1. [v] enter
1.1.5. [n] route, path, course
1.1.5.1. [prep] across
1.1.5.1.1. [v] cross
1.1.5.2. [prep] over
1.1.5.3. [prep] under (object)
1.1.5.4. [prep] underground
1.1.5.4.1. [v] tunnel
1.1.5.5. [prep] through
1.1.5.6. [prep] around (circling)
1.1.5.6.1. [v] circumnavigate
1.1.5.7. [prep] around (avoiding)
1.1.5.7.1. [v] avoid
1.1.5.7.2. [v] skirt
1.1.5.8. [prep] alongside
1.1.5.9. Traits of path or route
1.1.5.9.1. [adj] direct, straight
1.1.5.9.2. [adj] meandering
1.1.5.9.2.1. [v] meander
1.1.5.9.3. [adj] uncertain
1.1.5.9.3.1. [v] wander
1.1.5.9.3.2. [v] drift
1.1.5.9.4. [adj] convoluted
1.1.6. Other
1.1.6.1. [prep] with (another)
1.1.6.1.1. [v] accompany
1.1.6.3. [prep] following (another)
1.1.6.3.1. [v] follow
1.1.6.3.1.1. [v] track
1.1.6.3.2. [v] pursue
1.1.6.3.2.1. [v] chase
1.1.6.4. [prep] following, along, on, upon (road, track or path)
1.1.6.5. [prep] behind (another)
1.1.6.5.1. [v] trail [behind]
1.1.6.6. [prep] in front of (another)
1.1.6.6.1. [v] lead
1.1.6.7. [prep] upon (object)
1.1.6.7.1. [v] climb
1.1.6.7.2. [v] scale
1.1.6.7.3. [v] mount
1.1.6.8. [prep] past (another)
1.1.6.8.1. [v] pass
1.1.6.8.2. [v] overtake
1.1.6.9. [prep] versus, against (another)
1.1.6.9.1. [v] race
1.1.6.9.1.1. [n] race
1.1.6.10. [n] relocation
1.1.9.10.1. [v] relocate
1.1.9.10.2. [v] migrate
1.1.9.10.2.1. [n] migration
1.1.9.11. [n] agitation
1.1.9.11.1. [v] agitate
1.1.9.11.2. [v] shake
1.1.9.12. [v] navigate
1.1.9.12.1. [v] maneuver
1.1.9.12.2. [v] negotiate
1.1.9.13. [v] rearrange
1.1.9.13.1. [v] shift
1.1.9.13.2. [v] sort, arrange
1.1.9.13.3. [v] mix, jumble
1.1.7. [n] mode
1.1.7.1. [n] ambulation
1.1.7.1.1. [v] walk
1.1.7.1.2. [v]stroll
1.1.7.1.3. [v] run
1.1.7.1.3.1. [n] runner
1.1.7.1.3.2. [v] jog
1.1.7.1.3.2.1. [n] jogger
1.1.7.1.3.3. [v] trot
1.1.7.1.3.4. [v] gallop
1.1.7.1.4. [v] hike
1.1.7.1.4.1. [n] hiker
1.1.7.1.5. [v] trudge
1.1.7.1.6. [v] jump
1.1.7.1.6.1. [v] leap
1.1.7.1.6.2. [v] hop
1.1.7.1.6.3. [v] hurdle
1.1.7.1.7. [v] fly (unaided, as a bird)
1.1.7.1.8. [v] stumble
1.1.7.1.9. [v] crawl
1.1.7.1.10. [v] creep
1.1.7.1.11. [v] slither
1.1.7.1.12. [adj] rhythmic motion
1.1.7.1.12.1. [v] dance
1.1.7.1.12.2. [v] cavort
1.1.7.1.12.3. [v] sashay
1.1.7.1.12.4. [v] promenade
1.1.7.1.12.4.1. [v] promenade
1.1.7.1.12.5. [v] prance
1.1.7.1.12.6. [v] march
1.1.7.1.12.6.1. [n] march
1.1.7.1.12.7. [v] parade
1.1.7.1.12.7.1. [n] parade
1.1.7.1.12.7.2. [n] procession
1.1.7.1.12.8. [v] skip
1.1.7.2. [n] vehicle
1.1.7.2.1. [v] ride (on)
1.1.7.2.1.1. [v] cycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.1. [n] bicycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.2. [n] motorcycle
1.1.7.2.1.1.3. [n] cyclist
1.1.7.2.1.2. [n] horse, or other animal
1.1.7.2.1.2.1. [n] equestrian
1.1.7.2.1.2.2. [n] rider
1.1.7.2.1.3. [n] scooter
1.1.7.2.2. [v] ride (in)
1.1.7.2.3.1. [n] passenger
1.1.7.2.3. [v] drive
1.1.7.2.3.1. [n] driver
1.1.7.2.4. [v] pilot
1.1.7.2.4.1. [n] pilot
1.1.7.2.5. [v] fly
1.1.7.2.5.1. [n] flyer
1.1.8. [v] move another
1.1.8.1. [v] carry
1.1.8.2. [v] transport
1.1.8.3. [v] move
1.1.8.3.1. [v] push
1.1.8.3.2. [v] pull
1.1.8.3.3. [v] lift, raise
1.1.8.3.3.1. [v] elevate
1.1.8.3.3.2. [v] hoist
1.1.8.3.3.2.1. [n] hoist
1.1.8.3.3.3. [v] jack
1.1.8.3.3.3.1. [n] jack
1.1.8.3.4. [v] throw
1.1.8.3.4.1. [v] toss
1.1.8.3.4.2. [v] pitch
1.1.8.3.4.3. [v] lob
1.1.8.3.4.4. [v] hurtle
1.1.8.3.4.5. [v] heave
1.1.8.3.5. [v] put
1.1.8.3.6. [v] take
1.1.8.3.7. [v] remove
1.1.8.3.8. [v] transfer
1.1.8.4. Allow to move
1.1.8.4.1. [v] release
1.1.8.4.1.1. [v] drop
1.1.8.5. Cause to move
1.1.8.5.1 [v] send
1.1.8.6. Impel motion
1.1.8.6.1 [v] attract
1.1.8.6.1.1. [n] attraction
1.1.8.6.1.2. [n] attractant
1.1.8.6.2 [v] repel
1.1.8.6.2.1. [n] repulsion
1.1.8.6.2.2. [n] repellant
1.1.8.6.3. [v] rouse, arouse
1.1.9. [v] move (implied or unspecified cause)
1.1.9.1. [v] rise
1.1.9.2. [v] fall
1.1.9.3. [v] float
1.1.9.4. [v] sink
1.1.10. Motion of a fluid
1.1.10.1. [v] flow
1.1.10.2. [v] circulate
1.1.10.3. [v] splash
1.1.10.4. [v] oscillate
1.1.10.4.1. [n] wave
1.1.10.4.1.1. [n] breaker
1.1.10.4.1.2. [n] tsunami
1.1.10.4.1.3. [n] tidal wave
1.1.10.4.1.4. [n] wake (of a boat)
1.1.10.4.2. [v] slosh
1.1.10.5. [v] trickle
1.1.10.6. [v] drip
1.1.10.7. [v] spray
1.1.10.8. [v] squirt
1.1.10.9. [v] stir
1.1.10.10. [v] gush
1.1.10.11. [v] bubble
1.1.11. Change of posture
1.1.11.1. [v] stand
1.1.11.2. [v] sit
1.1.11.3. [v] lie
1.1.11.3.1. [v] recline
1.1.11.4. [v] kneel
1.1.11.4.1. [v] genuflect
1.1.11.5. [v] bow
1.1.11.6. [v] curtsy
1.1.12. Change of motion
1.1.12.1. [v] start
1.1.12.1.1. [v] embark
1.1.12.2. [v] stop
1.1.12.2.1. [v] halt
1.1.12.2.2. [v] yield
1.1.12.3. [v] turn
1.1.12.3.1. [v] deflect
1.1.12.3.2. [v] reflect
1.1.12.3.3. [v] rebound
1.1.12.3.4. [v] bounce
1.1.12.3.5. [v] detour
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:16 pm ((PDT))
Those are handy lists. Thanks for the links.
I think there may be too many head sections. Shouldn't all of creation
be capable of division into the three categories of 1.) space/time
(including changes in space/time like motion), 2.) matter/energy and
its properties and changes), and 3.) entropy/information (including
processes, natural laws, thoughts, ideas, design, art, music, and
anything else ideational, imaginary, or non-material.)?
--gary
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's 1911
> Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
> corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they
> had actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a
> machine to figure it out!)
>
> Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
> I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included, but
> I can do without for now.
>
> Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and move
> things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some categories
> and add others.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:50 pm ((PDT))
It does seem like the farther down the list the more confusing the categories.
Why is painting considered natural, yet speaking and writing are not?
Maybe reading through the words will shed some light on his reasoning, but it
could be the level of effort required to manage an ever-growing thesaurus of
that size without the aid of any automation. (Though back then, without
YouTube, iWhatever, and Portal for entertainment, what else could the guy to do
for fun but arrange words into lists...)
Lee
--- On Tue, 7/27/10, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Gary Shannon <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2010, 4:14 PM
Those are handy lists. Thanks for the links.
I think there may be too many head sections. Shouldn't all of creation
be capable of division into the three categories of 1.) space/time
(including changes in space/time like motion), 2.) matter/energy and
its properties and changes), and 3.) entropy/information (including
processes, natural laws, thoughts, ideas, design, art, music, and
anything else ideational, imaginary, or non-material.)?
--gary
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's 1911
> Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
> corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they
> had actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a
> machine to figure it out!)
>
> Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
> I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included, but
> I can do without for now.
>
> Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and move
> things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some categories
> and add others.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Karen Badham" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:53 pm ((PDT))
Gary, your capacity for tedium is amazing. That list is incredibly
impressive! And to think it only covers motion...
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Those are handy lists. Thanks for the links.
>
> I think there may be too many head sections. Shouldn't all of creation
> be capable of division into the three categories of 1.) space/time
> (including changes in space/time like motion), 2.) matter/energy and
> its properties and changes), and 3.) entropy/information (including
> processes, natural laws, thoughts, ideas, design, art, music, and
> anything else ideational, imaginary, or non-material.)?
>
> --gary
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's
> 1911 Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
> corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they
> had actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a
> machine to figure it out!)
> >
> > Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
> >
> >
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
> > I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included,
> but I can do without for now.
> >
> > Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and
> move things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some
> categories and add others.
>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2f. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:51 pm ((PDT))
Karen: Tedium is my Zen. :)
Lee:
Painting? Speaking? Writing? Which list are you referring to? My list
only has motion words. Or do you mean Roget's 1911 list?
BTW: Just for fun, I'm experimenting with an expandable/collapsible
tree display for my list:
http://fiziwig.com/conlang/knowledge/tree_of_knowledge.html
This is strictly experimental at this stage, and only has a couple of
nodes in it.
--gary
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> It does seem like the farther down the list the more confusing the
> categories. Why is painting considered natural, yet speaking and writing are
> not?
>
> Maybe reading through the words will shed some light on his reasoning, but it
> could be the level of effort required to manage an ever-growing thesaurus of
> that size without the aid of any automation. (Though back then, without
> YouTube, iWhatever, and Portal for entertainment, what else could the guy to
> do for fun but arrange words into lists...)
>
> Lee
>
> --- On Tue, 7/27/10, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Gary Shannon <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2010, 4:14 PM
>
> Those are handy lists. Thanks for the links.
>
> I think there may be too many head sections. Shouldn't all of creation
> be capable of division into the three categories of 1.) space/time
> (including changes in space/time like motion), 2.) matter/energy and
> its properties and changes), and 3.) entropy/information (including
> processes, natural laws, thoughts, ideas, design, art, music, and
> anything else ideational, imaginary, or non-material.)?
>
> --gary
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's
>> 1911 Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
>> corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they
>> had actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a
>> machine to figure it out!)
>>
>> Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
>>
>> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
>> I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included, but
>> I can do without for now.
>>
>> Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and move
>> things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some categories
>> and add others.
>
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2g. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:52 pm ((PDT))
Roget's 1911
--- On Tue, 7/27/10, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Gary Shannon <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2010, 7:41 PM
Karen: Tedium is my Zen. :)
Lee:
Painting? Speaking? Writing? Which list are you referring to? My list
only has motion words. Or do you mean Roget's 1911 list?
BTW: Just for fun, I'm experimenting with an expandable/collapsible
tree display for my list:
http://fiziwig.com/conlang/knowledge/tree_of_knowledge.html
This is strictly experimental at this stage, and only has a couple of
nodes in it.
--gary
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> It does seem like the farther down the list the more confusing the
> categories. Why is painting considered natural, yet speaking and writing are
> not?
>
> Maybe reading through the words will shed some light on his reasoning, but it
> could be the level of effort required to manage an ever-growing thesaurus of
> that size without the aid of any automation. (Though back then, without
> YouTube, iWhatever, and Portal for entertainment, what else could the guy to
> do for fun but arrange words into lists...)
>
> Lee
>
> --- On Tue, 7/27/10, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Gary Shannon <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2010, 4:14 PM
>
> Those are handy lists. Thanks for the links.
>
> I think there may be too many head sections. Shouldn't all of creation
> be capable of division into the three categories of 1.) space/time
> (including changes in space/time like motion), 2.) matter/energy and
> its properties and changes), and 3.) entropy/information (including
> processes, natural laws, thoughts, ideas, design, art, music, and
> anything else ideational, imaginary, or non-material.)?
>
> --gary
>
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I am thinking along the similar lines. None over the versions of Roget's
>> 1911 Thesaurus is in very good shape. I found one that claimed to have been
>> corrected and marked to make automated parsing easier. (It would be if they
>> had actually marked all the categories by hand, instead of expecting a
>> machine to figure it out!)
>>
>> Eventually, I found usable versions of the hierarchy on these wiki pages:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Outline_of_Roget%27s_Thesaurus
>>
>> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Roget%27s_thesaurus_classification
>> I would have preferred the bracketed "microcategories" also be included, but
>> I can do without for now.
>>
>> Despite the dated state of Roget's I'm going to run with it for now and move
>> things around later. Eventually, I will likely also delete some categories
>> and add others.
>
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2h. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 7:30 pm ((PDT))
Gary Shannon wrote:
> I was trying to make some sense out of the online 1911 Roget's
> thesaurus from Gutenberg. It's just a mess! A hodgepodge of categories
> that seldom make a lot of sense, and a hierarchy that's broken and
> scattered. (Not to mention incredibly parochial. Under the heading
> "Pseudo-Revelation" we find "the Koran, Vedas, Upanishads, Book of
> Mormon. Buddha; Zoroaster, Confucius, Mohammed.") Apparently to Roget
> all non-Christians are heathens.
>
> Well, anyway, just for fun I decided to see how difficult it would be
> to build a brand new hierarchy from scratch. A complete hierarchy of
> concepts is a monstrous undertaking, of course, so I settled on a
> small subset as a test of concept. My headword was "motion". Armed
> only with a hardcopy dictionary and thesaurus it took me not quite
> three hours to gather 279 motion words and arrange them into a
> hierarchy. I'm sure it's no where near complete, and probably not even
> correct, but it was an interesting exercise. It makes me think a
> hierarchical word list for use as a conlanging resource is a feasible
> project.
Minza and more recent projects of mine have the vocabulary organized in
a sort of hierarchy, but not as deep as this (e.g. all motion-related
words are in one big category). Within each category, related words are
arranged near each other. Antonyms and near-synonyms are usually close
together. It's not always easy to find a place for a new word, and some
words end up being misplaced just to put them somewhere, but it's
convenient when I'm looking for a way to translate something I don't yet
have a word for (I can usually find something with a similar meaning,
and either extend its meaning or make room for a new word).
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2i. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Ryan Dobie-Watt" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 9:28 pm ((PDT))
>
> Why is painting considered natural, yet speaking and writing are not?
I'd guess that it's because animals (like elephants and primates) do it,
whereas it's not entirely clear that animals "speak" in the usual meaning of
the word, and fairly unlikely that they write.
Ryan Dobie-Watt
[email protected]
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2j. Re: OT: Words are an endless source of fascination
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:14 am ((PDT))
Hallo!
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:24:41 -0400, Herman Miller wrote:
> Minza and more recent projects of mine have the vocabulary organized in
> a sort of hierarchy, but not as deep as this (e.g. all motion-related
> words are in one big category). Within each category, related words are
> arranged near each other. Antonyms and near-synonyms are usually close
> together. It's not always easy to find a place for a new word, and some
> words end up being misplaced just to put them somewhere, but it's
> convenient when I'm looking for a way to translate something I don't yet
> have a word for (I can usually find something with a similar meaning,
> and either extend its meaning or make room for a new word).
I use just that kind of thing to organize the vocabulary of
Old Albic. I have set up a broad taxonomy of concepts in which
I categorize the words; this is not always easy, and some words
are entered in categories where they seem rather awkward, for
lack of something fitting better. I feel that this a better way
of coming up with a well-rounded vocabulary than an alphabetic
dictionary, though one must be careful not to omit entire fields
of discourse.
I got my inspiration from Mark Rosenfelder's Thematic Dictionary
of Verdurian ( http://www.zompist.com/thematic.htm ), from which
I also adapted (but heavily modified) the taxonomy.
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Murray Gell-Mann
Posted by: "Daniel Nielsen" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:14 pm ((PDT))
Which is funny, considering his screwed-up naming conventions.
Dan
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Peter Bleackley <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I discovered from this week's New Scientist that Murray Gell-Mann has been
> doing some research on linguistics
> http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~mgm/Site/Research.html<http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/%7Emgm/Site/Research.html>
> His interest seems to be in researching long-range relationships between
> language families.
>
> Pete
>
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. The Results are In!
Posted by: "Donald Boozer" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:35 pm ((PDT))
http://library.conlang.org/blog/?p=345
The results are in for our "most influential/inspirational conlanger" twtpoll.
38 responses garnered a very interesting set of names. Check out the link above
to the post at The Conlanging Librarian blog.
Enjoy!
Don
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> 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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
