From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Tue Apr 22 17:50:34 2003
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web20512.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.175.20])
	by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12)
	id 1988Sa-0002iD-00
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:50:04 -0700
Message-ID: <20030423005003.15935.qmail@web20512.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [200.69.2.52] by web20512.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:50:03 PDT
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 17:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>
Subject: [lojban] Re: mi'e
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: <20030423000907.GA46531@allusion.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-archive-position: 4893
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


la djorden cusku di'e

> Why are they kludgey?  "zei" is a single syllable.

But each component keeps its own stress. I can't help hearing them
like separate words.

> I think the reason you (and others) think it is kludgey is because
> there are spaces in the spelling of lujvo with zei.  Think of "zei"
> like you think of the "y" or "r" or whatnot you add to other lujvo
> (bacrynandu, ma'argaltu), and it doesn't seem at all kludgey.

Well, I do think y and r glue are kludgey too, just somewhat less
so than {zei}. If {zei} wasn't kludgy we would only use zei-lujvo,
since they are so much more clear. Why do we prefer {bacrynandu}
to {bacru zei nandu}?

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com