From cbmvax!uunet!dsinc.dsi.com!dsinc.dsi.com!dino.ulowell.edu!gryphon Fri Aug 23 00:09:04 1991 Return-Path: (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA09013; Thu, 22 Aug 91 22:16:28 -0400 (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA07926; Thu, 22 Aug 91 18:20:48 -0400 Return-Path: id ; Thu, 22 Aug 91 18:20:36 EDT Message-Id: <9108222220.AA00325@dino> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 91 18:20:36 EDT From: cbmvax!uunet!dino.ulowell.edu!gryphon (Coranth) To: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com Subject: letter 'h' Status: RO coirodo. "I wrote: >>However, lojban also does not have a 'th' sound. Why not use the >>symbol 'h' for that...? Lojbab replied: >You answered your own question - because Lojban does not have the 'th' >sound. Why give a letter to a sound we don't recognize? Let me clarify. I think that lojban is lacking in not allowing the 'th' sound to exist. It has 'x', which is a sound not existing in most of the source languages, so that doesn't seem to be a reasonable excuse for elimiating 'th'. As for the potential abiguity, english 'g' has two sounds, so does 'c', not to mention most of the vowels. We don't seem to have any problems with them, so I think we can handle a single sound for the english 'th' In summary, we lose nothing putting it in, and gain a sound that is in use. Personally, I want to be able to pronounce me first name correctly "koranh" not "korant" and if my name were Ruth or Beth, I'd want it even more. " co'orodo. mi'e korant.