Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 34.195.253.206 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=34.195.253.206;
Subject: Re: [bpfk] Officially updating "Complete Lojban Language" grammar
 book. An official LLG proposal passed. Your help needed.
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
References: <391988c7-80ac-45c1-9549-8c22ebf6a113@googlegroups.com>
 <20190807173307.GL11404@nvg.org>
 <bdf122ba-16dd-0dea-47f5-aadd2224442d@kli.org>
From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Message-ID: <a8439dd7-f2e1-63bc-9de9-17bb2d14fcdd@lojban.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:31:24 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bdf122ba-16dd-0dea-47f5-aadd2224442d@kli.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -3.0
X-Spam_score_int: -29
X-Spam_bar: ---

On 8/14/2019 7:24 PM, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> Not quite directly relevant to this, but also regarding hyphens:=C2=A0 I=
=20
> recall long LONG ago, when I was making a lujvo of vofli+litru, (to=20
> express just "flying along"; it looks like vofli alone would have worked=
=20
> okay, but it may have had a different place structure then, or maybe I=20
> just didn't realize it.=C2=A0 Not the point), with the rafsi -voi- plus=
=20
> -li'u-, obviously I need a consonant hyphen to get the required=20
> consonant cluster, but the rules stipulated that it *had* to be -r-,=20
> thus, voirli'u. which at least to my articulatory organs felt quite=20
> awkward.=C2=A0 It winds up being closer to 4 syllables than 3; the -r-=20
> becomes vocalic, or nearly so.=C2=A0 Not so if I had been allowed to say=
=20
> *voinli'u.=C2=A0 Is there a reason to forbid giving the speaker a choice=
=20
> regarding the consonant-hyphen, given that there are only two(?) allowed=
=20
> anyway?

The original reason for having a rule on which consonant to use was so=20
that there would be a rule, and words would be spelled one canonical way=20
that could be implemented by computer (CLL section 4.11).  The rule also=20
required use of the shortest form by a specific scoring algorithm=20
(section 4.12).  The lujvo-making and scoring algorithm predates the=20
split between TLI Loglan and Lojban - JCB and I formulated it in May 1986.

Historically, however, some people wanted to not have to use the=20
specific scoring algorithm, and we now recognize multiple spellings of=20
the "same word" can exist using longer rafsi choices (e.g. voflylitru).=20
So I personally have no problem with using a different hyphen. I don't=20
think the morphology algorithm gives a problem (other than the general=20
rule that fu'ivla space is to be exclusive of lujvo space, which might=20
technically cause someone to think that voinli'u was a fu'ivla because=20
if it were a lujvo it would be voirli'u).

I think at the time, i actually liked the idea of having the hyphen=20
vocalized as a separate syllable, but that is probably personal aesthetics.

A formal change to allow this (and to state it as such in CLL) should=20
still require official approval by LLG (either a byfy-like group or the=20
Board.

lojbab

--=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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bpfk-list/a8439dd7-f2e1-63bc-9de9-17bb2d14fcdd%40lojban.org.