Re: TECH: grammar updates

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@GREBYN.COM>]

Your interpretation is correct and yet backwards.  Meanings of gismu have
all been intentionally broadened throughout the gismu list.  The intent
was that gismu be broad and rather nebulous, with the constraints being
primarily those indicated by the place structures (though obviously some
additional semantic definitions must be added).  The more constrained meaning
should be expressed in a lujvo.  It is far easier to clearly restrict
metaphorical scope in a tanru or lujvo, than to extend that scope in only
a limited way by such mechanisms.

Also, by using the broadest definitions, we are hoping to discourage people
from broadening the definitions still further, as has happened with the
metaphorical extension of English.  The main backstop for this discouragement
is, again, the place structrues:  if your metaphorical extension doesn't fit
the place structure, it isn't acceptable.  If it does, it probably is.

The compromise dates from the making of the new gismu list, and was directly
the result of the disputes between minimalists who wanted as few as possible
gismu and those who wanted to be sure there was full semantic coverage, even
at the extent of considerable redundancy if it happened.  I sided with the
latter and was outvoted (not to mention that my principle opponent was
Tommy Whitlock, who was doing the Hindi and Arabic; we haven't had very
good gismu making since the dispute, because Tommy refused to support adding
any more gismu, and we never found another volunteer).

lojbab