From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Tue Sep 03 04:21:26 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_0_1); 3 Sep 2002 11:21:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 36757 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2002 11:21:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Sep 2002 11:21:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 2002 11:21:25 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Tue, 3 Sep 2002 11:49:32 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 12:21:02 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 12:20:46 +0100 To: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: pronunciation guide for lessons Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810630 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin John Cowan 09/03/02 04:44am >>> > Well, I believe that is the correct policy. As long as the distinction > between Lojban /p/ and /b/ is audible, it matters little whether it > is about voicing, aspiration, or both. I'm not disputing the policy, but since the audibility of a distinction is highly subjective & coloured by the hearer's native accent, the policy amounts to saying "Lojban has these phonological=20 distinctions, & it's up to the speaker and hearer to find some way to implement them phonetically in such as way that the distinctions are mutually perceptible". --And.