Lexicon

[Uh-Oh]

Do we want an a priori lexicon, or a posteriori (and if so, using what basis), or a priori with mechanisms for adapting words from foreign languages (like English and German )?

[kadani]

I personally like a priori words... But we might need a way to transform words into our new language. If only so we can have native names.

[Miatato]

I would prefer a priori, and a method for adapting words we might want to borrow.

I wouldn't mind a whole native naming system, including a method for generating purely native names and names that have been adapted as well, but that's probably low priority and maybe a little ambitious at this stage.

Any thoughts on the lexicon document format?

[kadani]

I would suggest that we make the dictionary a csv file with a tab as separator. ie: word<tab>translation. Advantages:
* works everywhere both in a spreadsheet program and in an editor
* We can version control it easily (for example via git)
* does not require me to fight bloatware

[Matthew Turnbull]

I think i like it, but let me make sure. so we would have some thing like this

word\tabdefinition,word\tabdefinition, ect.?

and I'm not sure how version control software works, but if you say it'll go i trust you.

[kadani]

Actually:
Word\tabDefintion
Word\tabDefinition

For an example how a conlang definition in a version control system, see http://gist.github.com/101728

[Uh-Oh]

If we have decided on an a priori lexicon, and assuming we decide on a syllable structure, do we want to use one of the lexicon generating tools out there? Or is that too "soul-less" for people?

And do we want to start with a small core lexicon first?

[kadani]

Lexicon generating tools are IMHO too soulless.

[Matthew Turnbull]

I agree about the soulessness, perhaps we should just assign people semantic domains.