From LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:51:33 2010 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 31 May 1993 22:38:38 -0400 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9289; Mon, 31 May 93 22:37:44 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8993; Mon, 31 May 93 22:39:00 EDT Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1993 12:36:05 +1000 Reply-To: Nick Nicholas Sender: Lojban list From: Nick Nicholas Subject: Re: TECH: more on morphology problem - some opionions X-To: lojbab@GREBYN.COM X-Cc: Lojban Mailing List To: Erik Rauch In-Reply-To: from "Logical Language Group" at May 21, 93 11:26:23 am Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jun 1 22:36:05 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: The Seraphim surely rejoiced when Logical Language Group spoke thus: (hey, all. I haven't been that vocal here recently; nor, in fact, have most people. My excuse, at least, is that it's *that* time of the year again *sigh*, and this year has been particularly flat out for me. Let's see what I can get out, anyway). }1) The type 3 borrowings that cause the problem are prevalent these days, }and must continue to be easy to make. Correct. }2) le'avla/borrowing morphological space is sufficiently large and rich }enough that, when we get to the point where people want to make them, }type 4 (pure borrowings) le'avla have plenty of options, even if we add }some constraints. Correct. I'll agree on killing le'avla-initial consonant clusters as proposed. And it's obvious to me that vowel diphthongs should be legal in cmene and le'avla. }1) that close-commas (forced syllable breaks) which are 'significant' }would be banned from le'avla. In other words, no two le'avla could differ }merely by whether there is a close-comma forcing a syllable break at }some point. This has my full support. I think making some phonemic distinction in syllabification, with all the vagaries already present in pronunciation of glides etc., is just asking for trouble. }2. A new phonological category of "permissible initial cluster" be defined, }to apply to le'avla. Clusters at the beginning of words would be required }to be such that all pairs of consonants within the cluster be permissible }initial pairs, per the standard set already defined. Yup. }If vowel-initial borrowing roots had a suitable consonant preposed (and Nora }suggests 'x' as the norm, as being an easily invisible sound, and not too }hard after a liquid), I've always used {n}, but {x} seems quite acceptable. That old obsession of mine, finding a consistent morphological variant (not to mention pronunciation, and yes, I'm thinking about Latin) to use for borrowings from various languages, might deserve a mention. I do think that skamrpartitione is a much preferable form to skamrpartiti, skamrpartitio, or skamrpartici. --- 'Dera me xhama t"e larm"e, T Nick Nicholas, CgS & CS, Melbourne Uni Dera mbas blerimit | nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo) Me xhama t"e larm"e! | Milaw ki ellhnika/Esperanto parolata/ Lumtunia nuk ka ngjyra tjera.' | mi ka'e tavla bau la lojban. je'uru'e - Martin Camaj, _Nj"e Shp'i e Vetme_ | *d'oh!*