From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu May 14 05:06:29 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 14 May 2009 05:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M4Zhl-0001dp-05 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 05:06:29 -0700 Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.121]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M4Zhe-0001cN-IU for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 05:06:28 -0700 Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090514120615423.UPXQ748@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> for ; Thu, 14 May 2009 12:06:15 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 581D52B34 for ; Thu, 14 May 2009 08:06:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: CCVCCCCV Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 08:06:10 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <4de8c3930905131658t2a349af9w17ba5be09144571f@mail.gmail.com> <20090514003943.GA29600@sdf.lonestar.org> In-Reply-To: <20090514003943.GA29600@sdf.lonestar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200905140806.11369.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-archive-position: 1657 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Wednesday 13 May 2009 20:39:44 Minimiscience wrote: > de'i li 14 pi'e 05 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. tijlan .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra. > > > Is a fu'ivla of form "CCVCCCCV" valid? I couldn't find it on the "nice > > fu'ivla forms" list. > > .skamyxatra > > As far as I understand the morphology, yes, it is valid, as long as the > other rules for {fu'ivla} are followed (e.g., that first CC must be an > initial consonant pair). Except when {rafsi fu'ivla} come into play, no > {brivla} that contains four consonants in a row can ever be a {lujvo}, a > {gismu}, or a combination of {lujvo}, {gismu}, and/or {cmavo}, nor can it > ever fail the {slinku'i} test. I consider it to be valid if the first CC is an initial consonant pair, the other CCs are valid consonant pairs, and there is no "n[t|d][c|j|s|z]" in it. I'm not sure of xorxes's rules, but I think he would additionally require that the last CCC belong to a restricted set. So he would allow "slabjgle" but not "tramtsto", whereas I would allow them both. Even with rafsi fu'ivla, a lujvo can't have four consonants in a row unless they are in one of the component fu'ivla. Any rafsi ending in two or more consonants must have "y" after it if it's followed by another rafsi. Is there a particular fu'ivla you have in mind? Pierre