Message-Id: <m0tAmxK-0000ZRC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Wed, 1 Nov 1995 18:49:08 EST
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: Phonology Paper Released
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 6159
Lines: 140

> The sounds represented by the letters "c", "g", "j", "s", and "x" require
> special attention, either because they are ambiguous in the orthography
> of English ("c", "g", "s"), or because they are strikingly different in
> Lojban ("c", "j", "x").

Perhaps "... require special attention for speakers of English". Maybe this
is obvious, since the paper is written in English, but I am reading it and
for me there are some other sounds that require special attention as well.

> A period also may be found embedded in a word.  When this happens, the
> written word really represents two or more words that the writer feels are
> closely related.

I know what you mean here, but you are using "word" with different meanings.
I would just say that {na.e} is not one word but two. The comment might be
that it is not always required to write spaces to separate words, but in
that case the period shouldn't be omitted. Actually, even then, omitting it
wouldn't be a problem, except that {nae} might be taken for And's {na'e}.

> The distinction in writing between two words separated
> by spaces and by a period is purely notational and does not affect the
> meaning of any written text.

But not every time that two words are run together should a period be used.
The distinction between {le.nu} and {le nu} is not purely notational. It
doesn't affect the meaning but it does affect the pronunciation.

>  It is always legal to use the apostrophe (IPA [h])
> sound in pronouncing a comma.

Then it is not true that writing and pronunciation are one to one. In fact,
since other glides are also allowed instead of [h] for the apostrophe, it
seems that the comma and the apostrophe have a big overlap. Why not just
collapse them both into one?

> The six Lojban vowels are "a", "e", "i", "o", "u", and "y".  The first five
> vowels appear freely in all kinds of Lojban words.  The vowel "y" has a
> limited distribution: it appears only in Lojbanized names, in the Lojban
> names of the letters of the alphabet, and as a glue vowel in compound words.

by, cy, etc are pro-sumti, not the names of the letters of the alphabet.

>   It is not generally possible to express, in Lojbanized
> names, the sound caused by an adjacent consonant [r] and a syllabic [l`], or
> vice versa, without adding an adjacent vowel.

I don't understand this comment. Does it mean that for example {brlgan.}
is not a legal Lojban name? It doesn't seem more difficult than many other
ugly clusters.

> Vowel pairs involving "y" appear only in Lojbanized names and borrowings,
> except that ".y'y." is the Lojban name of the apostrophe letter.

Isn't .y'y. a pro-sumti?


> Lest this list seem almost random, a pairing of voiced and unvoiced equivalent
> vowels will show significant patterns which may help in learning:

I find something like this useful, showing that most initial pairs are
either Cr, Cl, or (s|z|c|j)C, and showing which are the only exceptions:


        pl      pr
        bl      br
        kl      kr
        gl      gr
        fl      fr
        vl      vr
        xl      xr
        ml      mr
        *       tr      tc      ts
        *       dr      dj      dz

        sl      sr      sn      sm      sf      sk      sp      st
        *       *       *       zm      zv      zg      zb      zd
        cl      cr      cn      cm      cf      ck      cp      ct
        *       *       *       jm      jv      jg      jb      jd


> Many languages do not have consonant clusters at all, and even those
> languages that do have them often allow only a subset of the full Lojban
> set.  As a result, the Lojban design allows the use of a buffer sound between
> consonant combinations which a speaker finds unpronounceable.  This sound
> may be any non-Lojbanic vowel which is clearly separable by the listener
> from the Lojban vowels. Some possibilities are IPA [I], [v], [U], or even [Y],
> but there probably is no universally acceptable buffer sound.

Many consonant clusters will be hard for Spanish speakers, but the
buffer vowel option is even worse. Having the schwa is bad enough,
but recognizing these other vowels is really a big problem.


> When using a
> consonant buffer, the sound should be made as short as possible.  Two
> examples showing such buffering (we will use [I] in this paper) are:
>
> 8.1)          vrusi
>               [Hvru si]
>               or [vI Hru si]

A Spanish speaker will probably hear "verusi" or "virusi", unless the
length of the vowels are clearly different. Maybe it would be a good
suggestion that when using buffer vowels, the normal vowels should
be pronounced clearly longer.

> Example 8.5 cannot contain any buffering vowel.  It is important not to
> confuse the vowel "y", which is pronounced [+], with the buffer, which has
> a variety of possible pronunciations and is never written.

This is because of the brody- rafsi, isn't it? Maybe an example
of why this could be ambiguous would help. (I had to think for a while
to realize that this was the cause for not allowing "y" as the buffer.)


> There are actually three levels of stress -- primary, secondary, and
> weak.  Weak stress is the lowest level, so it means no stress at all.
> Weak stress is required for syllables containing "y" or a syllabic consonant.

or a buffer, I suppose.

> However, primary stress may not be used in a syllable just preceding a
> brivla or a Lojbanized name, unless a pause divides them; otherwise,
> the two words may run together.

How could a stressed syllable possibly attach to a lojbanized name?
It would have to be either "la" or "doi", but even if stressed, those
could not attach to the name, could they?

> [B]   An allowed variant of Lojban "v".  Not an English sound; the Spanish
>       "b" or "v" between vowels.

Mmm... The problem is that Spanish speakers (at least me) identify their
"b/v" with "b", not with "v". When I have to make the distinction between
them it is "v" that I change, making it clearly labiodental, but "b"
stays more or less the same. IPA seems to agree with that, since it
uses the symbol [B] and not [V]. Why does Lojban make [B] a variant
of "v" rather than of "b"?

Jorge