toaq / toaq/dictionary

shaq, tıa, gao, guq, sıaq, lıo

Open
#79 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

needs discussing question semantics
Dominant language
Python
Stars
10
Forks
5
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Sample definition:

  {
    "toaq": "shaq",
    "type": "predicate",
    "english": "▯ is in front of ▯.",
    "gloss": "in.front",
    "short": "",
    "keywords": [],
    "frame": "c c",
    "distribution": "d d",
    "notes": [],
    "examples": [],
    "fields": []
  },

The definitions of shaq, tıa, gao, guq, sıaq and lıo should be clarified to show whether they are anatomical directions (e.g. shaq: ▯ is at the direction faced by / ahead of ▯) or directions relative to a third party or frame of reference (e.g. shaq: X1 is in X3's front direction from X2; X1 would be ahead of X3 if X3 were in place of X2 — here the third slot could maybe be dropped from the definition and expressed by other means, presumably in the same way as the frame of reference for duo (motion) and muoı (rotation) is to be expressed).

Whichever of these two paradigms is assigned to these roots, we shall not forget to create appropriate words for the other paradigm.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by comparing the definitions of shaq, tıa, gao, guq, sıaq and lıo with the stated paradigms for anatomical directions and third-party or frame-of-reference directions. Review how duo and muoı express reference frames; the work is done when one paradigm is clearly assigned and appropriate words for the other paradigm are identified.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
content
Issue type
Documentation
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.