From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Aug 20 21:56:12 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MeMAe-0001hG-0l for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:56:12 -0700 Received: from ol.freeshell.org ([192.94.73.20] helo=sdf.lonestar.org) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MeMAb-0001h7-Hc for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:56:11 -0700 Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:jwodder@iceland.freeshell.org [192.94.73.5]) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7L4u3pb007423 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:56:03 GMT Received: (from jwodder@localhost) by sdf.lonestar.org (8.14.3/8.12.8/Submit) id n7L4u2Nw022185 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:56:02 GMT Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:56:02 +0000 From: Minimiscience To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Reasoning for the apostrophe (Was Re: Re: proper pronunciation of apostrophe) Message-ID: <20090821045600.GA23987@sdf.lonestar.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org References: <817821.10705.qm@web110504.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20090820223413.GA28577@sdf.lonestar.org> <20090821021006.GA28775@sdf.lonestar.org> <498A72E6-B86F-46F3-99A9-DA79093EF08F@choi.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <498A72E6-B86F-46F3-99A9-DA79093EF08F@choi.name> Organization: SDF Public Access UNIX System User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) X-archive-position: 2076 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: minimiscience@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners de'i li 20 pi'e 08 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Joshua Choi .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra. > Yes, but it refers to Chapter 4, which doesn't explicitly explain the > reasoning. Whenever it mentions apostrophes, it's in something like "not > including the apostrophe" or "not counting the apostrophe". I'm only > guessing, but it sort of seems like the reasoning that "h" is represented > by the apostrophe is to emphasize that it doesn't count as a letter in a > lot of morphological rules. Is this right? .skamyxatra Yes, that's essentially what the quoted passage says. Using a letter of the Latin alphabet in a system in which it virtually isn't a letter, despite being surrounded by other Latin letters which are treated as full letters, was expected to be potentially too confusing. mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun. -- genai loi pruce gi po'o loi se pruce cu cenba