From LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:44:37 2010 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 17 Jun 1993 02:00:19 -0400 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1913; Thu, 17 Jun 93 01:59:11 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9694; Thu, 17 Jun 93 02:00:43 EST Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1993 01:59:11 EDT Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: TECH.QUERY *mexco X-To: I.Alexander.bra0125@oasis.icl.co.uk X-Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch X-Status: Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jun 16 21:59:11 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: Veijo wants attitudinal's. .uaro'ero'o.ianaicaise'i ba'anai la noras .e'ecai joi .i'i mi .a'a.a'ero'e mutce birti lenu lanli le valsi po'e le gi'uste .a'icai ca lenu finti gi'eji'a cipra leka xamgu sance terzba vau ba'anaicairo'aro'ero'i re'epeise'i .iku'izu'unai simlu fa na'ebo .oicaise'i .uu.oicaise'i .u'e.i'anaise'icai.u'ucairo'a.uuro'e .e'enaise'icai le sego'i .i vu'inai .e'oga'inai ko fraxu doi cecmu .ua .a'onai .i .eicai.e'i sutra cikre fu'i.a'o .ijo go'e ju'onai .o'unai .o'anai .o'unai .o'anai .o'unai .o'anai se'i zo'onai Switching back to English before I fry everyones emotional and Lojban-processing circuits, both Nora and I are sure that we specifically checked for just such problems with a program written for that purpose, but cannot find any record of it. We both recall the question coming up once before about one word (perhaps this one) very early, and it having been resolved either by a change or deciding it wasn't really a problem. I will presume that we did find it, and forgot to change the file, but I can find no records, nor the test program. Cowan has checked his archives too and found no discussion of it. So I presume someone screwed up royally, and it must have been me as main builder and maintainer of the gismu list. Given the triple baseline - morphology, gismu, and rafsi something has to change. We could optionally change the morphology rules to make xc permissible arguing on the grounds that no one has noticed that the word wasn't sayable yet, so it must really be sayable. The rationale for forbidding the cluster is the likelihood that speakers or listeners will confuse xc with kc, especially given that large numbers of the speaker base have trouble with 'x' in the first place. (I also note that my son, who is a native speaker of a language with an 'x', often pronounces it such that I can't tell it from a 'k'.) We decided to err on the side of caution with this letter. But Nora notes that a change to the permissible medials, especially one in the exception list rule defining them, is the smallest and least noticeable change. On the other hand, JL is going out with a new rafsi list, and prominent in the lujvo-making algorithm is the rules defining permissible clusters. So it may not be THAT unnoticeable. We can change the gismu, but to minimize impact, we would have to preserve the assigned 'mex' rafsi. The constraints on 'x' clusters doesn't give us a lot of choice. It seems most logical to change the 'c' to one of the four 'easy' consonants: l/m/n/r, giving mexlo, mexmo, mexno, or mexro. Of these, Cowan favors mexro, though it does make it closer to merko (but then it has been close enough to get confused with mekso, and an 'r' would help there. Nora and I find this acceptable. Any one else have an opinion? As a baseline change, it will be decided finally at LogFest, but I doubt that anyone will disagree with whatever we come up with here. Cowan has written a program to check for any more such surprises, and there aren't any. I guess we all owe Iain a ki'ecai.e'ese'inai for catching this the very first day I'm working on the dictionary full time. (mutter, mutter, mutter) lojbab