The Index Diachronica

[bradrn]

I will give it a try when I have some time. My writing community is having a holiday event this weekend.

Enjoy!

[bradrn]

Has anyone made any progress on this yet, or have people run into issues?

[Darren]

Has anyone made any progress on this yet, or have people run into issues?

I have no idea what any of that stuff means
I'll try and work it out after Christmas.

[bradrn]

Has anyone made any progress on this yet, or have people run into issues?

I have no idea what any of that stuff means
I'll try and work it out after Christmas.

Fair enough — enjoy the holidays!

[Zju]

Man, I keep telling myself that I'd make a review of the syntax and the website itself, then keep not doing it, because I have higher priority stuff (which, incidentally, also keep getting postponed).
But I do look forward to making a pull request with those stylistic suggestions of mine, and maybe even something else. Progress does look nice so far!

[bradrn]

Man, I keep telling myself that I'd make a review of the syntax and the website itself, then keep not doing it, because I have higher priority stuff (which, incidentally, also keep getting postponed).
But I do look forward to making a pull request with those stylistic suggestions of mine, and maybe even something else. Progress does look nice so far!

Thanks! It would be great if we could get some more momentum behind this.

(To be clear, for the moment I’m most interested in building up our library of sound changes… but stylistic improvements wouldn’t go unappreciated either!!)

[Man in Space]

(To be clear, for the moment I’m most interested in building up our library of sound changes… but stylistic improvements wouldn’t go unappreciated either!!)

How much of the OG Index is usable? If some of those could be ported over it’d save a lot of time and effort.

[bradrn]

(To be clear, for the moment I’m most interested in building up our library of sound changes… but stylistic improvements wouldn’t go unappreciated either!!)

How much of the OG Index is usable? If some of those could be ported over it’d save a lot of time and effort.

I have absolutely no idea, which is part of the problem.

[SquiDark]

(To be clear, for the moment I’m most interested in building up our library of sound changes… but stylistic improvements wouldn’t go unappreciated either!!)

How much of the OG Index is usable? If some of those could be ported over it’d save a lot of time and effort.

I mean the data is there. it's just need reviewing and format change i suppose?

[bradrn]

Now that it’s the new year, may I reiterate my call for people to have a go at submitting sound changes to the GitHub repository?

[Darren]

Now that it’s the new year, may I reiterate my call for people to have a go at submitting sound changes to the GitHub repository?

Very well.

[Zju]

Now that it’s the new year, may I reiterate my call for people to have a go at submitting sound changes to the GitHub repository?

Aight, sorry, I'm out of the loop, but is this about reformatting sound changes from the old ID to the new one using the new syntax, or about adding new sound changes from new sources?

Edit: also, is there an example of a submitted pull request?

[bradrn]

Now that it’s the new year, may I reiterate my call for people to have a go at submitting sound changes to the GitHub repository?

Aight, sorry, I'm out of the loop, but is this about reformatting sound changes from the old ID to the new one using the new syntax, or about adding new sound changes from new sources?

It’s sort of both — I don’t care whether the submitted sound changes were in the old ID or not, as long as they meet the standards of reliability expected for this new collection. It’s probably best to ignore the old ID entirely, and go back to re-transcribe the original sources.

Edit: also, is there an example of a submitted pull request?

No there isn’t, sorry. But that’s not a bad idea, so maybe I’ll make one if I get time.

[Vilike]

It would be good to document explicitly how many stars to award to the "consensus", "detail", etc. features.

[bradrn]

It would be good to document explicitly how many stars to award to the "consensus", "detail", etc. features.

Fair enough, I’ll write up something when I get a bit of time.

[bradrn]

It would be good to document explicitly how many stars to award to the "consensus", "detail", etc. features.

OK, I think this feels reasonable:

• Ordering:
  3/3 — relative ordering of sound changes is as fully presented as possible
  2/3 — ordering relations are presented between many sound changes, some non-ordered cases
  1/3 — some sound changes are ordered, most are ambiguous
  0/3 — no ordering information presented
• Exhaustivity:
  3/3 — source comprehensively describes all sound changes from the ancestor to the descendent
  2/3 — source makes a decent attempt at describing most sound changes
  1/3 — source has covered a variety of sound changes, but probably not all
  0/3 — source makes no attempt to be comprehensive (e.g. by having a narrow focus on certain phonemes or sound changes)
• Detail:
  3/3 — target and replacement phonemes and all conditioning factors are fully described for all sound changes
  2/3 — source makes a reasonable attempt to describe most conditioning factors
  1/3 — a few sound changes are detailed, many have little information on where they apply
  0/3 — only basic phoneme correspondences are presented
• Consensus:
  3/3 — source generally accords with commonly-accepted linguistic groupings (most sources should get this)
  2/3 — source presents less-established theory for an accepted linguistic grouping (e.g. glotallic-theory IE)
  1/3 — source presents a linguistic grouping where there is no consensus on the correct reconstruction (e.g. Afroasiatic, Dene-Yeniseian)
  0/3 — grouping which is not widely accepted (e.g. Altaic, Khoisan)
• Transcription:
  3/3 — source is extremely clear, you experienced no problems with your transcription and are certain it is correct
  2/3 — source is clear, possibly with some ambiguities or places you might have missed
  1/3 — source is somewhat unclear with many ambiguities
  0/3 — source is extremely unclear, you have no confidence in your transcription

Of course, these are all basically subjective, but it’s probably necessary to include all of these in one way or another.

[bradrn]

I’ve added some sound changes for Rapanui, based on Davletshin 2016. In the process I created a model pull request, in the hopes that it might help people understand the process of contributing to the website. (Or at least, how that process works at the moment… it could be changed if anyone has any better suggestions.)

[Man in Space]

I’ve added some sound changes for Rapanui, based on Davletshin 2016. In the process I created a model pull request, in the hopes that it might help people understand the process of contributing to the website. (Or at least, how that process works at the moment… it could be changed if anyone has any better suggestions.)

Thanks! I believe this will be of great use.

[Vilike]

Being relatively new at git and not using Brassica at all, I had some difficulties, but I hope the process will become a second habit to me.

[bradrn]

Being relatively new at git and not using Brassica at all, I had some difficulties, but I hope the process will become a second habit to me.

Thanks very much! I have some comments, but I’ll put them on the PR itself (which is here, for interested people).