From lojbab@lojban.org Mon May 26 07:47:29 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 26 May 2003 07:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lakemtao03.cox.net ([68.1.17.242]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19KJFr-0006TZ-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 26 May 2003 07:47:15 -0700 Received: from bob.lojban.org ([68.100.92.1]) by lakemtao03.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20030526144644.XMBY23518.lakemtao03.cox.net@bob.lojban.org> for ; Mon, 26 May 2003 10:46:44 -0400 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20030526103502.03bb0290@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: rlechevalier@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 10:46:12 -0400 To: From: Robert LeChevalier Subject: [lojban] Re: emotions In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030525081407.03168210@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-archive-position: 5408 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list At 12:48 PM 5/26/03 +0100, And Rosta wrote: >It's disyllabic. There is no shortage of bisyllabic cmavo space. What is this big need for monosyllabic cmavo, except perhaps for the REALLY frequent and fundamental words of the language like the logical connectives? No one has been hurt, so far as I know, by "le du'u"/"le se du'u" and "la'edi'u" being longer than one syllable, and I can imagine few things that need a shorter one. The argument for the lerfu-builders being monosyllables was that they never would stand alone, but would always be in a string of several cmavo, and we wanted to keep the string short. This is turn was motivated by the importance (and frequency) of acronyms in many languages, and the already difficult rendering of Chinese and other non-Roman characters in Lojban. Unicode has solved the latter, and we seem to be satisfied with other ways to use lerfu. (Don't know if gamma ray has a lujvo yet, though). So I could let those go (out of the language or longer cmavo - either way). I am also favoring that the byfy start using the xVV cmavo, as the reason for reserving them seems to be fulfilled by the current effort. -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org