Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qTGmB-000023C; Thu, 28 Jul 94 00:44 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6704; Thu, 28 Jul 94 00:43:18 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6700; Thu, 28 Jul 1994 00:43:18 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9041; Wed, 27 Jul 1994 23:42:25 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 1994 22:40:28 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: Lojbanized German place names To: lojban@cuvma.BITNET In-Reply-To: (Your message of Wed, 27 Jul 94 16:13:16 D.) Content-Length: 821 Lines: 21 John says: > I have argued in the past that the correct equivalents of \"u and \"o are > Lojban "i" and "e" respectively, because roundedness does not count in Lojban, > only tongue position. So "i" matches any high front vowel, and "e" any > mid half-front vowel. Turkish, e.g. is "natrmtirki,ie". > You missed devoicing a few final consonants, as Standard NHG pronunciation > demands. > Here are my suggested revisions. Feel free to take issue with any of them. > > xamburg. Hamburg > xamburk. Could you explain the argument that roundedness does not count? Couldn't the Lojban i/u & e/o distinction be one of roundedness rather than backness? More generally, I wd favour a Lojbanization of names that respects *spelling* over pronunciation. Or at least spelling shd be given equal weight. --- And