Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::231 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::231;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b15591f9-6745-49af-83c6-445550017c90@googlegroups.com>
References: <b3b7d9e9-570d-474a-88f0-a05dd5c1f1c8@googlegroups.com>
	<548AC3CB.7090403@gmx.de>
	<CACf3dPmTjTFDu6XSizag0N_-in_tqPjz-K4qhhhPBh2hpbAnTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<580B9AB84B34485AB4139B921C46CF42@gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPmuHy-wJDBhd=LKT3MscWiUW9S_+WH6H7Lrat-aY-YPQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<3ED463A548E74A53BD8F2ECEF0C620F8@gmail.com>
	<14FDADF47D7841A39D612894E81CC89B@gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPnh34=k0Ea78Aej+T9SUak4OdB=M-OcL5DY+1xLiPN9ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<20141214025736.GB19927@mercury.ccil.org>
	<CACf3dP=rO4GXPpKuAW22ZtZ9T0rt4drQGn1JucojB_moP9BZhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20141214190350.GD29313@mercury.ccil.org>
	<CACf3dPkhW5upoj+wXWbdVqovhZw2FtG2xcUcBkmJ4dP-rRjBBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2emCtHOCBQBtgDWuGx70vnBotX0Cbq9WCstcp7scx6=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkzzbPCTTMvkhywgU2KVOHbuFcDH_SHWxnXpUK2tXhZnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5660b66f-68e1-4e9c-b4ce-1713a7bf1491@googlegroups.com>
	<CACf3dPnCyyKUaedusZTLVO3Oza-hao=USjysQS0YtKFwh5kizA@mail.gmail.com>
	<b15591f9-6745-49af-83c6-445550017c90@googlegroups.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 18:22:21 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2c5FXxceMSy2wzQcSm3aseJ8UETirJdXWD1fVg4i5jXfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] official cmavo form
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3f16ae68390050a984d61
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a11c3f16ae68390050a984d61
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 5:34 PM, <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My vote comes with the qualification that the special GV cases /ii/ and
> /uu/ be made illegal (as others have suggested).  With all respect, it
> strikes me as perverse to be seriously considering whacking harmless
> syllables like /miu/ and /kua/ from cmevla when sequences like /lei/,
> /leii/, /leiii/ and /leiiii/ are all legal and contrastive, as are
> presumably /u'u/, /uu'u/, /u'uu/, etc.
>

"leiii" and "u'uu" are not legal by camxes, which does not allow a glide
after a diphthong (so "lei,ii" is out) and does not allow a glide after the
apostrophe (so "u'uu" is out),

"lei", "le,ii" and "le,ii,ii" contrast in number of syllables.


> I would also advocate the following:
>
> - forbid GV in fu'ivla/ma'ovla except after /./ (word-initially).  The
> pronunciation of disyllabic /ia/ and that of /i'a/ are too close.
>

Would it be more distinct word-initially than in other positions?  It seems
that .i,avla vs .i'avla are as distinct/undistinct as mi,avla vs mi'avla.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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.

--001a11c3f16ae68390050a984d61
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 5:34 PM,  <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:m=
aikxlx@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">maikxlx@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>My
 vote comes with the qualification that the special GV cases /ii/ and=20
/uu/ be made illegal (as others have suggested).=C2=A0 With all respect, it=
 strikes me as perverse to be seriously considering whacking harmless sylla=
bles like /miu/ and /kua/   from cmevla when sequences like /lei/, /leii/, =
/leiii/ and /leiiii/ are all legal and contrastive, as are presumably /u=
9;u/, /uu&#39;u/, /u&#39;uu/, etc.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></d=
iv><div>&quot;leiii&quot; and &quot;u&#39;uu&quot; are not legal by camxes,=
 which does not allow a glide after a diphthong (so &quot;lei,ii&quot; is o=
ut) and does not allow a glide after the apostrophe (so &quot;u&#39;uu&quot=
; is out),=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>&quot;lei&quot;, &quot;le,ii&quot=
; and &quot;le,ii,ii&quot; contrast in number of syllables.=C2=A0</div><div=
>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;b=
order-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I would a=
lso=20
advocate the following:<br><br>- forbid GV in <span>fu&#39;ivla/ma&#39;ovla=
</span> except after /./ (word-initially).=C2=A0 The pronunciation of disyl=
labic /ia/ and that of /i&#39;a/ are too close.<br></div></div></blockquote=
><div><br></div><div>Would it be more distinct word-initially than in other=
 positions?=C2=A0 It seems that .i,avla vs .i&#39;avla are as distinct/undi=
stinct as mi,avla vs mi&#39;avla.</div><div><br></div><div>mu&#39;o mi&#39;=
e xorxes</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;BPFK&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bpfk-list=
+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list@googlegrou=
ps.com">bpfk-list@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list">ht=
tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--001a11c3f16ae68390050a984d61--