Message-Id: <m0sAwyi-0009acC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Mon, 15 May 1995 06:00:58 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: cmene for "Thurston"
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 878
Lines: 16

Indeed, the way I would pronounce your name on sight would be
dil,n.  Most (American) Englissh speakers turn final unstressed -en -el
-er, -em , and often the corresponding -V{lmnr} as wll into the respective
syllabics with no explicit vowel.  At best there will be a drawing out
of the letter that might make one think there is a schwa there, until you
try to say it explicitly with a schwa.  JCB had some viirtue in his idea
for repressenting syllabic conssonantss by a double letter - if only he
had done so consistently throughout his language.  In which case you
might be dil,nn.  Perhapss with the implied lengthening of the nn, you
would be more comfortable with it.

The only "vowels" from the standpoint of the morphology are a/e/i/o/u
and y for non-hyphen situations.  (As a hypen, it iss considered more of a
linking noise akin to the hesitation sound "uh".)

lojbab