[Lexicog] A few Lexique questions

[Wayne Leman]

> First off, I'd like to say how delighted I am with Lexique Pro.
> Thank you, Richard Margetts!

Richard Applegate, I'm not Richard Margetts, but I'll try to answer a few of
your questions, and the Shoebox/Toolbox experts on the list can correct me
if I am wrong. I think Richard is in a location now where it is not so easy
for him to give details responses to Lexique Pro questions, but that may
change after awhile.

>
> I transferred a mini dictionary of Inezeño Chumash into Lexique
> Pro as a demo yesterday and loved the ease and flexibility of
> playing with the finished file, especially with sound files and
> images.  The native language students who've seen it are also
> delighted.

I have distributed our Cheyenne dictionary in the Lexique format to some
Cheyennes and am looking forward to seeing if they can access the
information more easily than they could with the Microsoft Word flat file
format.

>
> And there were a few things I wanted to do that I couldn't figure
> out.
>
> My main question: I don't want EVERY Inezeño entry to show a
> reverse gloss, so I used a \re field.  For example, I'd like a
> derivative that shows up twice in Inezeño (once as itself and once
> under the term it's derived from) to show up only once in the
> English panel.  And that way the English gloss with \eg can include
> additional info, such as "to be red," rather than just
> "red" in the case of stative verbs, to reinforce that it's a
> verb and not an English adjective.
>
> Unfortunately, the English sort keeps coming out based on the \eg
> field, so all the verbs show up under "to __" and "to be
> __" rather than being based on something like \re see ; look.
> What am I doing wrong here?

I *think* what you want to do is put your more complete English gloss in a
definition field (\de) and continue to put the gloss index entry (e.g.
"red") in your English gloss field or in the reverse English field \re. I
know that this works for Shoebox and Toolbox themselves and I assume that
Lexique will treat the different types of gloss fields the same.

>
> Is there a limit on how many example lines with \xv I can use?

I suspect not, but Richard M. could say.

That's all I am able to comment on from my own experience with Shoebox and
Lexique. I agree with you that Lexique is a great new tool for displaying
dictionary data.

Wayne
-----
Wayne Leman
Cheyenne website: http://www.geocities.com/cheyenne_language

> I'd like to add several lines of examples and/or discussion after
> certain main entries but they seem to get cut off after two or three
> or even one line.  Is there a way around this?
>
> Is there a way to format the \bw line so that it displays in
> Unicode?
>
> On my wish list:  it would be handy if there were a second level of
> subentry.  It would also be useful if there were a second panel of
> user-defined categories, for example for morphological patterns as
> well as for semantic categories.  I'd love to be able to list
> combinations of various adverbal and instrumental verb prefixes plus
> verb root all together by prefix, but at the moment that runs at
> cross-purposes with the semantic categories.
>
> These questions/suggestions are quite minor compared to my overall
> satisfaction with Lexique Pro, however; it's a great application.
>
> Thanks again, Richard Applegate



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/HKE4lB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/