From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Sun Nov 09 10:04:04 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KzEdn-0003Uu-UC for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:04:03 -0800 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.244]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KzEdl-0003Ul-Lt for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:04:03 -0800 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b17so2052918rvf.46 for ; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:04:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=zy3OCKtIvz8UvTONtKDnMxaViT8Ok8D+EK7Yzzxqh7k=; b=I8n4wdaMg2+kp9d35ZQPz9ijuRkk64yfYZpprQ+nUnaFJ3++opNCf6VOxfeKv9B0g3 XhjrbPhdvNadB4Yoba8/x158wwsHlP94l5PGS4IjvLj/SwV5N9iFGEmzKRyDvAM0OJUr dA8PE7LCSF0Eis4YEIub6WZM9r6zKlN/anPlE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=jv9YGQDZfPPOtec1ulkvNr4wv5gx73RpKV9YA7lc9sVhoGzH3ddcEir9QX5HqE8oZC o7KpsbY99cVqV2hwX8yKBEicSG9h7IMdihZrRg+dt9TbyEW5tKibWkAQLEgDkAnXdJ0p pzAujpgTeNCnp/J7YyN4wdzh0fP6aLrvhr8+E= Received: by 10.140.170.21 with SMTP id s21mr1435271rve.205.1226253840863; Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:04:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.141.194.15 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Nov 2008 10:04:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560811091004l2ec3cfadmfeb4bb6570462b24@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2008 15:04:00 -0300 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: eSpeak and lojban In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 14972 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Stephen Pollei wrote: > > The reason I prefer { b } to { yb } over { by } is because it > preserves it's cmevla status and doesn't change the word into a lerfu > valsi . I agree. I believe that handling these single letter cmene was the reason I had a consonant coda allowed in front of a cmevla in the preceding version of the peg morphology, before the zifcme idea. And my idea too was that they could always be supported by a leading {.y} (not only single letter cmevla, but any cmevla that begins with a consonant cluster that can't be a syllable onset with the usual rules). > I'd prefer if it didn't stress cmevla and leave that > up to the writer, but I could be wrong about that. I request feedback. In principle I share your preference, but I'd have to listen to some examples to be sure. > 2) dj and tc but not ts and dz has special support in jbo_rules, my > earlier patch had dropped that not sure if that's an improvement or > not. Someone who knows better should figure out of affricitives are at > their best. Consistency is probably the best idea, either affricate them all, or none. mu'o mi'e xorxes To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.