Message-Id: <199601161919.VAA14656@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Tue, 16 Jan 1996 14:45:23 -0500
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Subject:      TECH QUERY: variant fu'ivla
To:         Lojban List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
Content-Length: 949
Lines: 21

Lojban has the feature that there are many ways to write most lujvo:
"gurgle" can appear as "gu'ogle" or "gunrygle" or "gurgletu" or "gu'orgletu"
or "gunrygletu", and all of these are considered the same word, and
are therefore synonymous.

A parallel situation exists in type 3 fu'ivla (those made with gismu-based
prefixes): either a four-letter rafsi or a CCV rafsi can be used as the
prefix (CVC and CVV rafsi aren't safe):  "ricrxacere" and "tricrxacere"
are both possibilities for "maple" (genus >Acer<).  So far, the Lojban
community hasn't taken a position on whether or not these are to be
taken as equivalent.

I favor declaring them equivalent: while this limits the theoretical
size of fu'ivla space, it makes for simplicity:  you need not remember
whether "cipnrdodo" or "cpirdodo" is the official word for "dodo".

Comments?

--
John Cowan                                      cowan@ccil.org
                e'osai ko sarji la lojban.