[Edit: Please don't take this article too seriously!]
Let's take a look at the gismu list, and let me tell you up front that this won't be no picnic. The gimste is a fricking mess! Not only is it infested with irregularities that make it impossible for anyone in their right mind to go out there, show the gimste to potential new lojbanists and then leave without a very bad taste in their mouth, it's also so full of holes it's basically a big piece of rotting swiss cheese. And now I've taken it upon myself to sift through this abomination and do a major — merciless — clean-up.
The gimste is quite long, over one thousand items long, so I can't hope to go through all of it in a single post and even if I did, nobody would read it all. Slow and steady wins the race, although this doesn't seem to apply to Lojban, which is so slow it seems like it will never get to the finish line ever. But don't despair just yet, it's enough if one person loses their shit over this.
Let's begin in a sort of alphbabetical order. I won't hold back — tough love is on the agenda. I will make changes as I see fit, and remove whatever I don't like. (Good thing I have no actual power, right?!!)
bacru = x1 utters verbally/says/phonates/speaks x2
THIS WORD IS FUCKING STU... well, this one's okay I guess. It can stay the way it is.
badna = x1 is a banana of species/breed x2
{badna} and all the other animals and plants with "of species x2" are fine, but what the fuck is up with {tirxu} and {lanme}? tirxu3 is especially ridiculous. Why not have mlatu mean "x1 is a cat of species x2 with number of whiskers x3" then? It's just stupid, is the answer. lanme3 and tirxu3 are going and they won't be missed.
badri = x1 is sad about x2
Here is the first emotion-gismu, one of .. not many. Lojban is extremely lacking in emotional expressions! I don't see a problem with {badri} itself though. Just... the fact that it's so alone. I'll repeat my earlier prediction: There will need to be 50-200 new gismu, several of them about emotions.
bajra = x1 runs on surface x2 using limbs x3 with gait x4 2b
Oh that's cute. With gait x4. The only times I talk about different gaits is when I talk about horses, and that doesn't happen often. Why does the gait matter? It's too specific for such a should-be general word, and why does bajra have a gait-place when cadzu does not? A bit random, isn't it? I say either all ambulation gismu have a gait-place or none of them do. So: deleting gait place. GTFO, which means GAIT the fuck out. The limbs argument (x3) is okay, and it parallels cadzu's x3, and well, we can use lujvo for {x1 runs to x2 ...}, so I'll leave the other places alone for now.
bakfu = x1 is a bundle/package/cluster/clump/pack [shape/form] containing x2, held together by x3
No comment.
bakni = x1 is a cow of species x2
AND NOT "x1 is a cow of species x2 with horn curvature x3 if male" !!!
bakri x1 is a quantity of/contains/is made of chalk from source x2 in form x3
So... does it contain it or is it chalk? What the shit is this about? Why is this in all the material gismu? Was the intention behind this that we can say {mi djacu} for "I contain water"? If so, please excuse me while I go {pinxe lo remna}. And of course there is yet another random x3 that crops up here that we don't find in related gismu, like, say, {kolme}. Is Lojban supposed to be regular? Do we want people to learn it? THEN WHY IS THERE SO LITTLE STRUCTURE IN THE GIMSTE? Scrap places that aren't essential! It's still chalk no matter what form it's in. I'm sorry, but bakri3 is a goner.
baktu = x1 is a bucket of contents x2, made of material x3
Still no comment. Despite the different wording, one could say it parallels {bakfu}, so that's fine. Let's wait for the ones that don't fit the pattern, and we all know they exist (and what they are).
balre = x1 is a blade of tool/weapon x2
Could also have been "x1 is a blade of material x2", but I have no strong feelings about the gimste definition.
bapli = x1 [force] (ka) forces/compels event x2 to occur; x1 determines property x2 to manifest
I know I'm supposed to freak out at the sight of this {ka}-suggestion in the definition. However, the definitions were written long ago when abstractions were still quite shaky. To me, bapli1 is an agent or an event (event/agent-polymorphism, one of the many polymorphic types I have catalogued), so in that light, the word seems fine. One could wonder in what way {bapli} differs from {rinka} and {gasnu}; the gimste seems to stress that the x2 of bapli must happen or it's not an event of {bapli}, but... Maybe what it really means is that if x1 happens, then it is impossible for x2 not to happen. So there is also a relation to (one of the two) banzu.
bargu = x1 is an arch/arches over/around x2 and is made of x3
Good word, but the x3 seems excessive. {cripu} ("bridge") has no material-place, why {bargu}? The x3 is completely identical to an added {gi'e marji x3}. On the other hand, {karli} does have the same structure with the same x3, so it might be good afterall. As long as they all follow the same pattern, there is no real problem. Still, the more places a gismu has, the harder it is to learn, and cutting down on the number of places means making the language easier to learn.
barja = x1 is a tavern/bar/pub serving x2 to audience/patrons x3
{dunda}-type.
batci = x1 bites/pinches x2 on/at specific locus x3 with x4
There are a few such gismu. I'm talking about the "on object x2 at specific locus x3" thing. But some gismu that could have don't, and some that do shouldn't. It sucks major ass when you can't use the same structure for "The dog bit me in the ass" and "The cat's claws cut me in the arm". I'm fine with having to refactor the second one to get {lo jgalu be lo mlatu cu sraku lo birka be mi}, which is putting the specific locus in as the only sumti, but I think it's bullshit that I should have to use two different structures. Get rid of all these pairs of "whole<->specific". Deleting batci3, as well as catke3, cinba3, darxi4 above all, and also jgari4, same thing. They are modelled after English, but they have no consistency. It's bad news for Lojban, and I don't like bad news for Lojban.
batke = x1 is a button/knob/[handle] on/for item x2, with purpose x3, made of material x4
#!*$&x"
Okay, I'm not saying the places aren't useful. But just look at this definition. It's like a kitchen sink. Just throw in whatever might be useful, order doesn't matter. Something feels off, and I don't know how to fix it. But I do notice that IT HAS A PURPOSE PLACE WTFuuuuuuuuuu. How could they put a "with purpose" place inconspicuously into a definition, but then not give us a gismu that just plain means "x1 has purpose x2". WHAT THE SHIT is this special treatment? It's one of the biggest holes of the gimste, and you mock us by waving a hint of it in front of our faces in the form of the x3 of a gismu about buttons? Are you shitting me? Fuch this, I'm ripping this place out and I want my purpose-gismu, right now.
Okay, this is it for the first installment of How-selpahi-loses-his-shit-over-some-definitions-that-he-shouldn't-be-nearly-as-emotional-about-as-he-is,-except-I-think-he's-right-in-being-annoyed-at-the-inconsistency-and-is-speaking-from-a-position-of-love-for-the-language,-and-a-position-of-hope-for-a-good-and-wealthy-future-for-it,-in-which-such-structural-shortcomings-are-an-unnecessary-burden,-and-we-can-do-better-than-that.
To be continued...
Note: This post is satirical and makes use of exaggeration for comedic purpose with no intention of hurting anyone.
Let's take a look at the gismu list, and let me tell you up front that this won't be no picnic. The gimste is a fricking mess! Not only is it infested with irregularities that make it impossible for anyone in their right mind to go out there, show the gimste to potential new lojbanists and then leave without a very bad taste in their mouth, it's also so full of holes it's basically a big piece of rotting swiss cheese. And now I've taken it upon myself to sift through this abomination and do a major — merciless — clean-up.
The gimste is quite long, over one thousand items long, so I can't hope to go through all of it in a single post and even if I did, nobody would read it all. Slow and steady wins the race, although this doesn't seem to apply to Lojban, which is so slow it seems like it will never get to the finish line ever. But don't despair just yet, it's enough if one person loses their shit over this.
Let's begin in a sort of alphbabetical order. I won't hold back — tough love is on the agenda. I will make changes as I see fit, and remove whatever I don't like. (Good thing I have no actual power, right?!!)
bacru = x1 utters verbally/says/phonates/speaks x2
THIS WORD IS FUCKING STU... well, this one's okay I guess. It can stay the way it is.
badna = x1 is a banana of species/breed x2
{badna} and all the other animals and plants with "of species x2" are fine, but what the fuck is up with {tirxu} and {lanme}? tirxu3 is especially ridiculous. Why not have mlatu mean "x1 is a cat of species x2 with number of whiskers x3" then? It's just stupid, is the answer. lanme3 and tirxu3 are going and they won't be missed.
badri = x1 is sad about x2
Here is the first emotion-gismu, one of .. not many. Lojban is extremely lacking in emotional expressions! I don't see a problem with {badri} itself though. Just... the fact that it's so alone. I'll repeat my earlier prediction: There will need to be 50-200 new gismu, several of them about emotions.
bajra = x1 runs on surface x2 using limbs x3 with gait x4 2b
Oh that's cute. With gait x4. The only times I talk about different gaits is when I talk about horses, and that doesn't happen often. Why does the gait matter? It's too specific for such a should-be general word, and why does bajra have a gait-place when cadzu does not? A bit random, isn't it? I say either all ambulation gismu have a gait-place or none of them do. So: deleting gait place. GTFO, which means GAIT the fuck out. The limbs argument (x3) is okay, and it parallels cadzu's x3, and well, we can use lujvo for {x1 runs to x2 ...}, so I'll leave the other places alone for now.
bakfu = x1 is a bundle/package/cluster/clump/pack [shape/form] containing x2, held together by x3
No comment.
bakni = x1 is a cow of species x2
AND NOT "x1 is a cow of species x2 with horn curvature x3 if male" !!!
bakri x1 is a quantity of/contains/is made of chalk from source x2 in form x3
So... does it contain it or is it chalk? What the shit is this about? Why is this in all the material gismu? Was the intention behind this that we can say {mi djacu} for "I contain water"? If so, please excuse me while I go {pinxe lo remna}. And of course there is yet another random x3 that crops up here that we don't find in related gismu, like, say, {kolme}. Is Lojban supposed to be regular? Do we want people to learn it? THEN WHY IS THERE SO LITTLE STRUCTURE IN THE GIMSTE? Scrap places that aren't essential! It's still chalk no matter what form it's in. I'm sorry, but bakri3 is a goner.
baktu = x1 is a bucket of contents x2, made of material x3
Still no comment. Despite the different wording, one could say it parallels {bakfu}, so that's fine. Let's wait for the ones that don't fit the pattern, and we all know they exist (and what they are).
balre = x1 is a blade of tool/weapon x2
Could also have been "x1 is a blade of material x2", but I have no strong feelings about the gimste definition.
bapli = x1 [force] (ka) forces/compels event x2 to occur; x1 determines property x2 to manifest
I know I'm supposed to freak out at the sight of this {ka}-suggestion in the definition. However, the definitions were written long ago when abstractions were still quite shaky. To me, bapli1 is an agent or an event (event/agent-polymorphism, one of the many polymorphic types I have catalogued), so in that light, the word seems fine. One could wonder in what way {bapli} differs from {rinka} and {gasnu}; the gimste seems to stress that the x2 of bapli must happen or it's not an event of {bapli}, but... Maybe what it really means is that if x1 happens, then it is impossible for x2 not to happen. So there is also a relation to (one of the two) banzu.
bargu = x1 is an arch/arches over/around x2 and is made of x3
Good word, but the x3 seems excessive. {cripu} ("bridge") has no material-place, why {bargu}? The x3 is completely identical to an added {gi'e marji x3}. On the other hand, {karli} does have the same structure with the same x3, so it might be good afterall. As long as they all follow the same pattern, there is no real problem. Still, the more places a gismu has, the harder it is to learn, and cutting down on the number of places means making the language easier to learn.
barja = x1 is a tavern/bar/pub serving x2 to audience/patrons x3
{dunda}-type.
batci = x1 bites/pinches x2 on/at specific locus x3 with x4
There are a few such gismu. I'm talking about the "on object x2 at specific locus x3" thing. But some gismu that could have don't, and some that do shouldn't. It sucks major ass when you can't use the same structure for "The dog bit me in the ass" and "The cat's claws cut me in the arm". I'm fine with having to refactor the second one to get {lo jgalu be lo mlatu cu sraku lo birka be mi}, which is putting the specific locus in as the only sumti, but I think it's bullshit that I should have to use two different structures. Get rid of all these pairs of "whole<->specific". Deleting batci3, as well as catke3, cinba3, darxi4 above all, and also jgari4, same thing. They are modelled after English, but they have no consistency. It's bad news for Lojban, and I don't like bad news for Lojban.
batke = x1 is a button/knob/[handle] on/for item x2, with purpose x3, made of material x4
#!*$&x"
Okay, I'm not saying the places aren't useful. But just look at this definition. It's like a kitchen sink. Just throw in whatever might be useful, order doesn't matter. Something feels off, and I don't know how to fix it. But I do notice that IT HAS A PURPOSE PLACE WTFuuuuuuuuuu. How could they put a "with purpose" place inconspicuously into a definition, but then not give us a gismu that just plain means "x1 has purpose x2". WHAT THE SHIT is this special treatment? It's one of the biggest holes of the gimste, and you mock us by waving a hint of it in front of our faces in the form of the x3 of a gismu about buttons? Are you shitting me? Fuch this, I'm ripping this place out and I want my purpose-gismu, right now.
Okay, this is it for the first installment of How-selpahi-loses-his-shit-over-some-definitions-that-he-shouldn't-be-nearly-as-emotional-about-as-he-is,-except-I-think-he's-right-in-being-annoyed-at-the-inconsistency-and-is-speaking-from-a-position-of-love-for-the-language,-and-a-position-of-hope-for-a-good-and-wealthy-future-for-it,-in-which-such-structural-shortcomings-are-an-unnecessary-burden,-and-we-can-do-better-than-that.
To be continued...
Note: This post is satirical and makes use of exaggeration for comedic purpose with no intention of hurting anyone.
RSS Feed
