Received: from mail-oi0-f57.google.com ([209.85.218.57]:51452) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XhJJP-0000bp-6f; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:30 -0700 Received: by mail-oi0-f57.google.com with SMTP id x69sf213240oia.22 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=message-id:date:from:organization: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; bh=N5EFtr0S10QfN/zNy1jqPYI6HukErfOwcUz6z6gPl7I=; b=eJRz2q5Tq9jLV4rbj9uhMzKx1MmWCWxI3lR0sY6/iyCOpfndUIiEuChP0cxqBcq6LP fJYwFMwNGKQ1IAI12I0tKWUPGNHtTWhHgHvRTYKrj3pwzLjQbSU4y6KqV7BT8x5jJYc1 rUq0Zban9mKMC3HAXw7XiCky3N/+TglRUnVCNXWJ6ZbBm2QxNSl4mdUfBLrEBIssn6kW 4voTZqs0ENogK6JrywVLaC5mwjLwRtPfXE0r83/Zk2s0DMaMmVV27tPIifVG0g1uGcwc VaShn/eFToYbQ+hVoyGk2V4L00OJhYWUbzwG+Yip95ncJ4NeFnRfXi8hcgfHSb/A68vo XmOg== X-Received: by 10.50.3.4 with SMTP id 4mr168426igy.15.1414074255452; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:15 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.107.134.151 with SMTP id q23ls813061ioi.18.gmail; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.42.138.2 with SMTP id a2mr8327794icu.22.1414074255278; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmfepo103.cox.net (eastrmfepo103.cox.net. [68.230.241.215]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id im4si402472qcb.1.2014.10.23.07.24.14 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 07:24:14 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: none (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=68.230.241.215; Received: from eastrmimpo110 ([68.230.241.223]) by eastrmfepo103.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.15 201-2260-151-145-20131218) with ESMTP id <20141023142414.FSXQ31158.eastrmfepo103.cox.net@eastrmimpo110> for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:24:14 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.102] ([72.209.248.61]) by eastrmimpo110 with cox id 6eQE1p0061LDWBL01eQE4M; Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:24:14 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020204.54490F8E.016B,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=GKHW5JxK c=1 sm=1 a=z9jnGXjs1dxvEuWvIXKNSw==:17 a=BGi6d-X4uLYA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=3nzxVOpjzlN464SUOY0A:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=z9jnGXjs1dxvEuWvIXKNSw==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <54490F94.60609@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:24:20 -0400 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 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> <54461EDB.70808@gmail.com> <5u8H1p00Y56Cr6M01u8JrF> In-Reply-To: <5u8H1p00Y56Cr6M01u8JrF> X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: lojbab@lojban.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org 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 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - On 10/21/2014 2:08 PM, John Cowan wrote: >> If /'/ is to be kept distinct from /x/, /'/ must be [T], giving [aTua] >> for /a'ua/, which is unlikely to become [awa]. > > I'm not sure if this is meant to be an anglophone or a universal claim. > Anglophones tend to render [x] as [k], as in _loch, bach, Bach_, and > Germans have no problem distinguishing /h/ and /x/ systematically, > though it's arguable that there are no [h] : [x] minimal pairs, as [h] > is only in onsets whereas /x/ in onsets is realized (in the standard > accent, at least) as /C/. > >> It would be an assimilation rather than a fortition. As I've said >> before, [h] is articulatorily impossible as a realization of /'/ >> in some environments, e.g. /i'i/, at ordinary speech rates, > > I articulate /i'i/ as [iCi], /u'u/ as [uWu], /ii/ as /j\i/ (with a voiced > palatal fricative like Spanish-Spanish "y"), and /uu/ as [wu]. > >> 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, but making it contrastive with zero between other vowels gives >> greater headaches. I'd have just forbidden them altogether; going all >> Livagian on their ass, 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 vowel but u, and a to be followed by no vowel >> but i and u. > > This would, of course, involve a complete discarding of the cmavo list and > starting over. I haven't been following this discussion, and I'm not sure what is written in CLL about it, but I think what we said originally was that the apostrophe could permissibly be realized as ANY unvoiced consonant sound not otherwise found in Lojban (but hopefully being fairly consistent at using the same sound all the time). One of our original Lojban students liked to tease everyone by using unvoiced "th" as his realization of all apostrophes. It sounded funny and probably caused everyone else to try harder to use 'h'. lojbab -- 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 email 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.