From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Nov 26 19:28:59 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:28:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L5XYp-0006BV-CU for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:28:59 -0800 Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.123]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L5XYf-0006Aw-CZ for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:28:59 -0800 Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20081127032838.VLBM4332.cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com@chausie> for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:28:38 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BBD7260E for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:28:37 -0500 (EST) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: Superfluous {tosmabru} check? Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:28:31 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <20081126231234.GA21340@sdf.lonestar.org> In-Reply-To: <20081126231234.GA21340@sdf.lonestar.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200811262228.32761.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 15079 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Wednesday 26 November 2008 18:12:37 Minimiscience wrote: > coi logji jbopre > > Note the highlighted part. The only two reasons that a 'y' hyphen would > have been inserted was if (a) it came after a four-letter {rafsi}, in which > case it would not be at the end of a sequence of CVC {rafsi}, or (b) it > came in the middle of an impermissible consonant pair. However, an > impermissible consonant pair clearly cannot be a valid initial consonant > pair, and so the "joint" at that location would always cause no further > hyphens in the word to be needed. Item 5a even explicitly states that the > last joint is the last consonant of the CVC sequence plus the first > consonant of the 'X' part, "*ignoring any ``y''-hyphen before the X*", and > so it can never be true in such a {lujvo} that all joints are initial > consonant pairs. Thus, the {tosmabru} test will always indicate that a > {lujvo} of the form "(CVC)* + 'y' + X" does not need any further hyphens, > and so applying the test to such a {lujvo} in the first place is completely > pointless. Is this true, or am I missing something very basic? It is possible for 'y' to be required without the two rafsi having an impermissible consonant pair. Here is an example: mi jbinytcadu mijybinytcadu It is also possible for the type-3 fu'ivla algorithm in the Book to produce an invalid word, for the same reason. An example is "ler + djamo", which would be "lerndjamo" by the Book, but has to be "lerldjamo". Pierre 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.