Received: from mail-gh0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]:57158)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCOO27LuODBDUuL6BBRoEXW6Gbw@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1T2jKl-0002dH-B8; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:45:08 -0700
Received: by ghbf16 with SMTP id f16sf5007940ghb.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject
         :mime-version:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results
         :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id
         :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe
         :list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=nSp2MVpqRDqOT+/J33Xt/3CERBUPStkj6PpvGr7ZL7s=;
        b=MSsc+De9rt3F2gCMZqQuo3X38pQkCqRuRq+SrpvV74eZEfijrDxd/rExZEPgIJeUnT
         m7sIRFb+LHfRXJPDEtS0s4Z/lAqwywFp3AK9IbnlySLU0O4A3dt7rgDZdC8+eHbilLjn
         GLRWXMy0GmBJdjKNwg6CC0NG0THDC240VuWog=
Received: by 10.236.173.202 with SMTP id v50mr2638265yhl.19.1345297492816;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.236.154.170 with SMTP id h30ls11063598yhk.7.gmail; Sat, 18 Aug
 2012 06:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.109.233 with SMTP id s69mr2615397yhg.11.1345297492108;
        Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:44:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 06:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: iesk <pa.fae@gmx.de>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <a0790d1b-3918-4d59-94c0-a892673fe7a1@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <502F7031.5050702@gmail.com>
References: <CALm==BVL4ReGUDDfKkS8UCpSyQ2MM55JwBAs3Ae6LCp9FEFb_g@mail.gmail.com>	<000e0cd5187e58762a04c77bb7d6@google.com>	<CAMKwHj36YbO7PVFDpwro-P1AwtFGd8cFLDuHjmwzSrXtMO+f+Q@mail.gmail.com>	<502ED43E.1060804@gmail.com> <CAMKwHj3jVrJVU8rbSFe8-gv_4cbUnU1VKymdocbDjgxkWN9s7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <502F7031.5050702@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Zombie
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Original-Sender: pa.fae@gmx.de
X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of
 pa.fae@gmx.de designates internal as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=pa.fae@gmx.de; dkim=pass
 header.i=@gmx.de
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_1367_11749046.1345297491033"
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_1367_11749046.1345297491033
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Given that Lojban is 'complete' (baselined) and Lojban phonotactics don't=
=20
forbid {ii} in that position, I guess this exchangue of opinions is about=
=20
the phonaesthetics of a word like {dzombii}, right? Otherwise I can=E2=80=
=99t see=20
why the relative difficulties speakers of various linguistic backgrounds=20
might have pronouncing it could be relevant.

After all, Lojban just isn=E2=80=99t very easy to pronounce. (On the contra=
ry, I=20
find it surprisingly difficult.)

iesk

Le samedi 18 ao=C3=BBt 2012 12:36:33 UTC+2, And Rosta a =C3=A9crit :
>
> Jonathan Jones, On 18/08/2012 01:28:=20
> > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:31 PM, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com<javascrip=
t:><mailto:
> and....@gmail.com <javascript:>>> wrote:=20
> >     Jonathan Jones, On 17/08/2012 21:19:=20
> >=20
> >         It shouldn't be difficult at in Lojban. {ii} is a diphthong=20
> >         pronounced "YEE", {i} is a vowel pronounced "EE".=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >     ...and that's easy only for native anglophones, helped by the=20
> diphthongal character of "EE" in most accents.=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > I highly doubt that. The consonant-y sound appears in a whole variety o=
f=20
> languages.While Japanese doesn't have "yi", it does have =E3=82=84"ya", =
=E3=82=86"yu", and=20
> =E3=82=88"yo", which are distinctive sounds from =E3=81=82"a", =E3=81=86"=
u", and =E3=81=8A"o".=20
>
> You transmute healthy skepticism into pigheadedness. Why the gap at "yi"?=
=20
> What is the phonetic difference between {i} and {ii} and why do you suppo=
se=20
> it to be easy?=20
>

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lo=
jban/-/CWKDnBx6TZkJ.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.


------=_Part_1367_11749046.1345297491033
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Given that Lojban is 'complete' (baselined) and Lojban phonotactics don't f=
orbid {ii} in that position, I guess this exchangue of opinions is about th=
e phonaesthetics of a word like {dzombii}, right? Otherwise I can=E2=80=99t=
 see why the relative difficulties speakers of various linguistic backgroun=
ds might have pronouncing it could be relevant.<br><br>After all, Lojban ju=
st isn=E2=80=99t very easy to pronounce. (On the contrary, I find it surpri=
singly difficult.)<br><br>iesk<br><br>Le samedi 18 ao=C3=BBt 2012 12:36:33 =
UTC+2, And Rosta a =C3=A9crit&nbsp;:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: =
1ex;">Jonathan Jones, On 18/08/2012 01:28:
<br>&gt; On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:31 PM, And Rosta &lt;<a href=3D"javascri=
pt:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"xOg0zfI3eO0J">and....@gmail=
.com</a> &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscate=
d-mailto=3D"xOg0zfI3eO0J">and....@gmail.com</a>&gt;&gt; wrote:
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; Jonathan Jones, On 17/08/2012 21:19:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; It shouldn't be difficult at in Lojban=
. {ii} is a diphthong
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; pronounced "YEE", {i} is a vowel prono=
unced "EE".
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; ...and that's easy only for native anglophones, help=
ed by the diphthongal character of "EE" in most accents.
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; I highly doubt that. The consonant-y sound appears in a whole vari=
ety of languages.While Japanese doesn't have "yi", it does have =E3=82=84"y=
a", =E3=82=86"yu", and =E3=82=88"yo", which are distinctive sounds from =E3=
=81=82"a", =E3=81=86"u", and =E3=81=8A"o".
<br>
<br>You transmute healthy skepticism into pigheadedness. Why the gap at "yi=
"? What is the phonetic difference between {i} and {ii} and why do you supp=
ose it to be easy?
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msg/lojban/-/CWKDnBx6TZkJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/CW=
KDnBx6TZkJ</a>.<br />=20
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />



------=_Part_1367_11749046.1345297491033--