From Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de Sat Feb 01 02:56:23 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Sat, 01 Feb 2003 02:56:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw6.gedas.de ([139.1.44.12] helo=spree.gedas.de) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18evJg-0008BU-00 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2003 02:56:09 -0800 Received: from spree.gedas.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spree.gedas.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11316 for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2003 11:56:02 +0100 (MET) Received: from blnsem05.de.gedas.vwg (blnsem05.gedas.de [139.1.84.49]) by spree.gedas.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11312 for ; Sat, 1 Feb 2003 11:56:02 +0100 (MET) Received: by blnsem05.de.gedas.vwg with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Sat, 1 Feb 2003 11:55:51 +0100 Message-ID: From: "Newton, Philip" To: "'lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org'" Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Rythmic cu Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 11:55:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-archive-position: 39 X-Approved-By: Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: Philip.Newton@datenrevision.de Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 09:11:12PM -0500, JJ121449@aol.com wrote: > > When speaking, is cu rhythmically linked with the following selbri? > > No. In some cases, as I understand it, it must *not* be stressed, and > that is certainly your safest choice. cmavo immediately before selbri may, as I understand it, *never* be stressed (unless followed by a pause). Otherwise words can break apart -- {micuklaMULno} is "I have arrived" but {miCUklaMULno} is "I am completely round" (though {miCU.klaMULno} is "I have arrived" again). Though I'm not quite sure what "rhythmically linked" means -- if it means "pronounced as an unstressed prefix" then that's completely fine -- {cuklaMULno} and {cu.klaMULno} mean exactly the same thing and are separated as the two words {cu klamulno}. So AIUI it's never wrong to pronounce {cu} as part of the following selbri (e.g. without pausing for breath or changing intonation pattern) as long as it's unstressed. Just as in a multi-syllable selbri, only the penultimate may be stressed AIUI. mu'omi'e filip. -- filip.niutyn. All opinions are my own, not my employer's. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.