Received-SPF: none (google.com: phma@bezitopo.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=107.14.166.225;
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@bezitopo.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Let's create a word: Wasabi
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 00:03:18 -0500
Message-ID: <2022609.cTRFnCMaBH@caracal>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.13.0-39-generic; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <b049af39-6b35-4a2c-bce4-caaadc8eb624@googlegroups.com>
References: <d7de7081-3c90-4c1c-a1fd-2edb053bd72d@googlegroups.com> <CAO7tK2fJpNLaUy9jzr6M0U_yuPsx1EbqhaHYWpX65Qt7eXKt3w@mail.gmail.com> <b049af39-6b35-4a2c-bce4-caaadc8eb624@googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

On Friday, November 21, 2014 15:29:14 la .gusek. wrote:
> Okay, again maybe I should rethink. Any idea why "vlatai" wasn't programmed
> to take diphthongs into account this way?

Vlatai was written before there was a precise analysis of what a Lojban 
syllable is.

> Regarding your recommendation with a full stage-4, I don't agree with that
> line of thinking (but I get your point). Personally, I find it frustrating
> to see stage-4:s created directly and have trouble taking them "as
> seriously" as stage-3:s (I know I shouldn't react this way, but I do). I
> intuitively respect "sorpeka" much, much more (since it was created out of
> need and from an existing word), than stage-4:s with no pre-existing need
> and actual stage-3. I kind of want a stage-3 to exist before hand, and it's
> usage to *motivate* the creation of a stage-4. It feels like a "waste" of
> semantic space as well as unnecessary and risky behaviour (without
> guaranteeing syntactic non-decomposing).

I don't have any problem with creating stage-4's straight off. I do make 
stage-3's when the foreign part is too short (e.g. bakrto), doesn't fit well 
into stage-4 shape, or would be ambiguous between two very different things 
(e.g. rutrmalpigi, ragrmalpigi). "sorpeka" was shortened from a lujvo, not a 
stage-3.

I think that there should be a clear distinction between stage 3 and stage 4. 
Once I borrowed a word "turndun" (an Australian noisemaker, also called a 
bullroarer). At first I got "turndunu", but that is a stage-3 for some kind of 
structure, so I altered it to "turdunu".

Pierre
-- 
li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du
li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.