Received: from mail-la0-f59.google.com ([209.85.215.59]:41416)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBDNZFNNFVAHRB6HKWKRAKGQEIMANG3Q@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1XiJVY-0006B8-BS; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:49:11 -0700
Received: by mail-la0-f59.google.com with SMTP id gi9sf426200lab.14
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:56 -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=ggS/d/mkcDlSyO9Y/28LhErKXQwffbhJoE7lcTgqitI=;
        b=rWxsksESuep+f9xsI7O5ctJYDUsAWOQJdXGWfY6bAFoA1Aw7nukgpzfFZleh5aLIQi
         KpqrE8+PTgHq/hCFeKfQd5okPMh+qv2j2Q86fIaF+5He4CNwPQL5REzcGoOmN3utb/Ze
         7gXDcQmBny5HpAGiDg9n/yw5K+sfar0KOKmRSPHmOIPfjdRE+nMBtytazS/T8YiXnryI
         WLFA4MbNvMmRPr3/QXPq7uiHh3UxpAWselC089KMPX5/4HUn/W5ir1nFJIZCTS8cIaDw
         BHMZolAqRxOJOQ7LtmOYmCYKMDERFIgSaKkTmKRTMW7jcrz3vYoRLdOLmezIQdXQ+uOm
         reVw==
X-Received: by 10.180.90.240 with SMTP id bz16mr42314wib.20.1414313336279;
        Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.103.228 with SMTP id fz4ls341752wib.11.gmail; Sun, 26 Oct
 2014 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.178.163 with SMTP id cz3mr4312196wjc.1.1414313335960;
        Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::230])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h1si413694wib.0.2014.10.26.01.48.55
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::230 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::230;
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id n3so4077011wiv.3
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.142.147 with SMTP id rw19mr2183111wjb.64.1414313335720;
        Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.4] (97e2292d.skybroadband.com. [151.226.41.45])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ny6sm7565345wic.22.2014.10.26.01.48.54
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Sun, 26 Oct 2014 01:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <544CB576.2070503@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 08:48:54 +0000
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
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] camxes and syllabification in zi'evla
References: <33A9DB5129C54FFF85FCDD708B6909D8@gmail.com> <CAO7tK2e9Ukj2MaEm-Xr9-dAenOM7wX4fSm1Ci8BKg-QSchswRQ@mail.gmail.com> <9c2066d4-8da6-48ec-9cfb-63f79ca42187@googlegroups.com> <CAO7tK2fJeQQUrvgo1MzP_XNMhk2or3c6yTERwvdREjM9F9uCKw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO7tK2eN1oc0JQyr0Rd6ESy-Giq7RW0UbMNRQfXs6K6MD-9fow@mail.gmail.com> <20141025153624.GA1727@mercury.ccil.org> <CAO7tK2c3huhqOQa25rKojYUszJGre5DCrmHwCABkC0sH_cH8NQ@mail.gmail.com> <544BF508.3060500@gmail.com> <24AD03E6AEA1476F9B53E0EE111750E9@gmail.com> <544BF94F.3040204@gmail.com> <CAO7tK2d+_h498M+7jnuhTutY0-h6U3ZUj++2D0YM8ooMk72ZDg@mail.gmail.com> <CAO7tK2d1HEaJNgGPnFmC-0t_epj9G7xwBizqZ-yJ8Q-JhnfBaA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2d1HEaJNgGPnFmC-0t_epj9G7xwBizqZ-yJ8Q-JhnfBaA@mail.gmail.com>
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::230
 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: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+972099695765+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

Jorge Llamb=EDas, On 25/10/2014 21:34:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com <=
mailto:jjllambias@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Can we talk about "morphophonological syllables"? If yes, then assume=
 this discussion is basically about morphophonological syllables rather tha=
n phonological ones.

"Morphogical syllables" (maybe renamed to something a little less susceptib=
le to confusion) would be fine. My questions would then be what the rules a=
re and why. The norms of language don't constrain morphophonological rules =
much, so they can be as weird and wacky as necessary. The rule you give bel=
ow, CVC*, seems pretty straightforward.

> Actually, that's not quite true. We do need to identify valid onsets
> in order to determine words, but this discussion wasn't really about
> onsets.

The question about onsets being whether CGV is a valid onset?

But "morphological onsets" are needed too, aren't they. E.g. /patrAma/ is t=
wo words /pa trAma/ whereas /partAma/ is one word, because of the rules for=
 morpho-onsets.

> I would have to agree that if the buffer vowel was real, all this
> discussion would be mostly nonsensical. So I would say that the
> buffer vowel is basically a myth. None of the phonological
> constraints make much sense if there was a buffer vowel.

Well, today's morphophonology is yesterday's phonology (e.g. the vowel alte=
rnation in _sane--sanity_), so it makes sense diachronically but not synchr=
onically. But for Lojban you don't look for diachronic explanations. (In Lo=
jban too the actual explanation is of course quasi-diachronic, in that the =
complex constraints on 'clusters' were likely invented before the buffer vo=
wel.)

> I don't think I've ever heard anyone speak lojban with a buffer
> vowel, and it would probably sound very confusing.

FWIW I used to use one (with erroneous allophony) in certain environments (=
but treated it as metrically invisible), in particular in environments z_C,=
 m_C (to avoid confusion with mbC) and, for obstruent C, /C_./.

> Without a buffer vowel, it does make sense to limit the amount of
> consonant clustering that can occur. If there was a buffer vowel,
> the morphophonological syllable could still be onset-nucleus-coda as
> now, but with the coda allowed to contain as many consonants as you
> wanted. That's not how my dialect of lojban works though.

In what way is it not how your dialect of Lojban works? It would categorize=
 as valid some words that you categorize as invalid? Or would it insert wor=
d-boundaries differently? The latter seems more significant an objection th=
an the former.

So anyway, do you advocate abolishing the buffer vowel? An alternative woul=
d be to insist that every licit phonological string has both a CV syllabifi=
cation (with buffer vowels) and a resyllabification without buffer vowels. =
That alternative strikes me as needlessly complex, but as still preferable =
to abolishing the buffer vowel.

--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.