From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Apr 02 20:24:10 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:24:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JhG3e-0006B5-OG for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:24:10 -0700 Received: from web56401.mail.re3.yahoo.com ([216.252.111.80]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JhG3a-0006Ao-Vs for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:24:10 -0700 Received: (qmail 3219 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Apr 2008 03:24:00 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=sWY31JyHwT9ZvsaeM6tzQ00Ilb1uy9DqoAC0hEqATyp+IAwdp4rsQ4lAYHNAt5emH7MHEozcyoh9bskw6fB/QYq1XklHHb6WFBDcybY85lgK+bmwYJ2EOpO0ZYZLod/4Bz6nfdVL0VEQ1icgWtvnkzdAKEx6jjYFU6mIUWfIsIo=; X-YMail-OSG: 1RJ3E9MVM1lMYm4aL40fd.frLgyMBOu3PeQtCnKf25tof60yk1EOtX7FvyI8r6lnQOKHZbv.axKstC9zd4TkTrqC6N4E9Lt4MIjzKzmpwRugSV4JS7dunkAvWVqRKIu3ikWE7h137I58ufQMr9Or7b.D3g-- Received: from [71.239.170.88] by web56401.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:24:00 PDT Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 20:24:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Nathaniel Krause Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: forbidden consonant pairs To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <925d17560804021353s656b194v3f49909dff4d82b2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1828398257-1207193040=:2622" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <719364.2622.qm@web56401.mail.re3.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 452 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners --0-1828398257-1207193040=:2622 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jorge Llambías wrote: On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:28 PM, wrote: > In a message dated 4/2/2008 04:42:27 AM Central Daylight Time, > ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > > 4) The specific pairs ``cx'', ``kx'', ``xc'', ``xk'', and ``mz'' > are forbidden. > > If "sx" and "xs" are allowed (and they are), then "cx" and "xc" should be > allowed too. "sx" and "cx" should even be valid initials. "sx" is the only valid pair that starts with "s" but is not a valid initial. > If "nz" is allowed, then "mz" should be. Ruling out one in favor of the > other makes no sense. Same with the triplets ntc, nts, ndj, ndz. And forbidding "xk" and "kx" while allowing "fp", "pf", "ts", "st", which are also stop and fricative pairs at the same point of articulation, is not very consistent. mu'o mi'e xorxes I would guess that the logic of allowing "sx" but disallowing "cx" is that the sounds of "c" and "x" are too similar and so it might be difficult for speakers to keep them distinct as a cluster in normal speech. It seems plausible that "x" might tend to be fronted to something closer to [ç] (the palatal fricative) in some environments. "c" apparently includes sibiliants realised anywhere behind the alveolar ridge, so there is some possibility of overlap. The logic of forbidding "mz" is apparently the opposite: that "mz" is likely to mutate into "nz" because nasal sounds like to cluster with other sounds that are at the same position. I can't say this sounds very compelling to me, though, and I wouldn't mind seeing this rule abandoned. As for "kx", Wikipedia notes that the [kx] affricate is quite uncommon in the world's languages. On the other hand, it says the same about the [pf] affricate, and clearly not all stop-continuant consonant clusters in Lojban are intended to be seen as affricates. I wonder how the world's languages tend to handle clusters involving [x] across syllable boundaries. Personally, I find [kx] difficult to pronounce, but that, of course, is subjective. On the other hand, I find [xk] fairly readily pronounceable, and actually fairly euphonious -- that is even more subjective. mu'o mi'e .sen. --------------------------------- You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. --0-1828398257-1207193040=:2622 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:28 PM, wrote:
> In a message dated 4/2/2008 04:42:27 AM Central Daylight Time,
> ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:
>
> 4) The specific pairs ``cx'', ``kx'', ``xc'', ``xk'', and ``mz''
> are forbidden.
>
> If "sx" and "xs" are allowed (and they are), then "cx" and "xc" should be
> allowed too.

 "sx" and "cx" should even be valid initials. "sx" is the only valid
pair that starts with "s" but is not a valid initial.

> If "nz" is allowed, then "mz" should be. Ruling out one in favor of the
> other makes no sense.

Same with the triplets ntc, nts, ndj, ndz.

And forbidding "xk" and "kx" while allowing "fp", "pf", "ts", "st",
which are also stop and fricative pairs at the same point of
articulation, is not very consistent.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

I would guess that the logic of allowing "sx" but disallowing "cx" is that the sounds of "c" and "x" are too similar and so it might be difficult for speakers to keep them distinct as a cluster in normal speech. It seems plausible that "x" might tend to be fronted to something closer to [ç] (the palatal fricative) in some environments. "c" apparently includes sibiliants realised anywhere behind the alveolar ridge, so there is some possibility of overlap.

The logic of forbidding "mz" is apparently the opposite: that "mz" is likely to mutate into "nz" because nasal sounds like to cluster with other sounds that are at the same position. I can't say this sounds very compelling to me, though, and I wouldn't mind seeing this rule abandoned.

As for "kx", Wikipedia notes that the [kx] affricate is quite uncommon in the world's languages. On the other hand, it says the same about the [pf] affricate, and clearly not all stop-continuant consonant clusters in Lojban are intended to be seen as affricates. I wonder how the world's languages tend to handle clusters involving [x] across syllable boundaries.

Personally, I find [kx] difficult to pronounce, but that, of course, is subjective. On the other hand, I find [xk] fairly readily pronounceable, and actually fairly euphonious -- that is even more subjective.

mu'o mi'e .sen.

You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. --0-1828398257-1207193040=:2622--