Received: from mail-wg0-f63.google.com ([74.125.82.63]:35491) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XgVBV-0007wB-6U; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:58 -0700 Received: by mail-wg0-f63.google.com with SMTP id m15sf63373wgh.28 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=85tQvRvGmvIi7Hlv0mqbv9uRQ7qYeSHMLa6/rG0Ul9c=; b=ai94vciAHYLIvPpoQ/Fllwd4vE8Q/9bvhm1T8Svi8Pdy8DvcZiOi6rPzavlUdsbaOW nB/eSmUfHnwj9F1xF089TjettxldLUCs1+deyznu/PYNWgsBiflMppLYW7AOWLI9JII0 ej0MUj9ptjCWJQN1ih5i9b8qwyJTGMLAKHynImsZPVBRGLLoGSZVv3JdfLD5So6TeklC 7Rjs2i4hVgVzSo6XMrTrC1tMaA0VUf+hi9tuUaZsei+J0GrQL/9am3W2vrcvsVd5igDq nZRp1HOeCuqpBp29rNr4WOPCd0OlM5i996DFaiOwHAXZYIoV11CzGKJJlA3SpXqs/Ych 8xkA== X-Received: by 10.180.84.197 with SMTP id b5mr90213wiz.2.1413881562735; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.94.135 with SMTP id dc7ls72042wib.36.gmail; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.98.165 with SMTP id ej5mr4103750wib.1.1413881562379; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22a.google.com (mail-wi0-x22a.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ca20si520880wib.3.2014.10.21.01.52.42 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a; Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id hi2so10384885wib.1 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.57.210 with SMTP id k18mr11889089wjq.110.1413881562283; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.208] ([95.147.226.113]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q9sm12376992wix.6.2014.10.21.01.52.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Oct 2014 01:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <54461EDB.70808@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:52:43 +0100 From: And Rosta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120711 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [bpfk] official cmavo form References: <5444FEBF.10200@gmx.de> <544507CD.9050608@gmail.com>

<20141021000349.GM14499@mercury.ccil.org> In-Reply-To: <20141021000349.GM14499@mercury.ccil.org> X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_bar: -- John Cowan, On 21/10/2014 01:03: > And Rosta scripsit: > >> Ah. So the two-word version needn't be "a'u.ua"? I had been thinking tha= t >> all words must begin with a consonant. > > Normatively they must, but the concern is that such glottal stops will > be unstable, since they are not (in the absence of "a'ua"-style words) > necessary for word separation. Is the concern that because /./ is elidable when its presence is not morpho= logically contrastive, the risk is that through habit it would end up being= elided even when it is? There are various solutions to that. One, as with = Dotside, is to not elide it at all. Another is to elide it willynilly, and = worry about distinguishing the unelided and elided versions only when the a= ddressee might misunderstand; though, a problem with that is that it is har= d to carefully and deliberately show that one is using a properly /./-less = form. > In any case, I was talking about "a ua" [a?wa] as hard to distinguish > from "a'ua" [ahwa], both tending to become simple [awa]. Specifically for L1 English speakers, you must mean, rather than for people= in general. Does it really make sense to base the rules of Lojban on the s= pecific needs of L1 English speakers? Many L1 English speakers would tend to hear /a.ua/ as /at ua/. If /'/ is to be kept distinct from /x/, /'/ must be [T], giving [aTua] for = /a'ua/, which is unlikely to become [awa]. >> or, more realistically, [aWua] or [axua]. > > The latter is "a xua"; [x] cannot be used as an allophonic fortition of [= h]. It would be an assimilation rather than a fortition. As I've said before, [= h] is articulatorily impossible as a realization of /'/ in some environment= s, e.g. /i'i/, at ordinary speech rates, and the /'/:/x/ is not robustly su= stainable. Under the current rules, /./ must be [T] (contrastive voiceless = continuant). OTOH, usage has, I think, hitherto enshrined a posterior voice= less fricative as the realization of /'/, so overlapping with /x/. With rul= e changes, /'/ could be /G/, or got rid of entirely, which would be my pref= erence, tho it would eliminate Lojban's most distinctive (if egregiously no= isome) feature; to eliminate it would -- for many -- be like a well-loved f= riend having cosmetic rhinoplasty -- they might emerge more beautiful, but = not with the face one has loved so dearly. John Cowan, On 21/10/2014 01:26:> And Rosta scripsit: > >> But must Lojban so specify the duration of the /i/ in /ia/? That seems >> unnecessarily pernickety, given the quite proper laxity of all other >> realization rules in Lojban. If, rather, what is settled is that /i/ in >> /ia/ is an onset, then I am asking why that must be so. > > Historically, I think it rose out of the introduction of ' to simplify th= e > Loglan pronunciation rules. > > In Loglan there is no ', and therefore only > 25 VV sequences rather than Lojban's 29 (ignoring "y" in both languages). > These 25 break into four groups according to pronunciation: > > ai ei oi ao are always falling diphthongs (in practice, ao is pronounced > [aw] like Lojban au). > > ae au ea eo eu oa oe ou are always two syllables; when e is the first, > it is allophonically [e] rather than [E]. > > aa ee oo are always two syllables *and* one of the syllables is required > to bear the stress (so words like "baarsoa" are invalid, unlike the > Lojban analogue "ba'ars'oa"); ee oo are very rare. > > iV and uV may be pronounced either as rising diphthongs, as in Lojban, or > as two syllables: therefore "stomia" may be either ['stomja] or [sto'mia]= . The Loglan treatment of /ia/ is clearly better (because it doesn't require = rules of syllabification). /ii, uu/ are problematic either way, and should = be forbidden. The Loglan way is problematic if it must contrast /ia/ and /i= ia/. Obviously it was the glideless /ae, ea, aa/ type that led to Lojban's "'". = That in itself was not so bad a move, tho the choice of realization was, bu= t making it contrastive with zero between other vowels gives greater headac= hes. I'd have just forbidden them altogether; going all Livagian on their a= ss, I'd allow i to be followed by any vowel but i, u to be followed by any = vowel but u, e to be followed by no vowel but i, o to be followed by no vow= el but u, and a to be followed by no vowel but i and u. --And. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.