Message-Id: <199602091207.OAA01804@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Fri, 9 Feb 1996 07:05:42 -0500
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: loglan rapprochement orthography
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1219
Lines: 24

>> In short: names and ".i" are capitalized, word-final pauses are written
>> as commas, word-initial pauses are either not marked or are marked by
>> adding a comma to the previous word, syllabic r l m n are doubled, /x/
>> is written as "h", /au/ is written as "ao", apostrophes are replaced by
>> commas (which need not be written unless ambiguity would result, viz.
>> a,i e,i o,i a,o always; i,a i,e i,i i,o i,u u,a u,e u,i u,o u,u in UIs,
>> names, and fu'ivla).
>
>Thanks. Is this a rejected proposal, or is it an official alternative
>orthography?

It has been ignored by JCB, and was proposed as part of the negotiation
effort.  It's status is therefore something akin to "officially proposed".
It has been in the drafy dictionary for a long time and hence can be
considered as official as anything not part of the current baseline.
But on the other hand it has bever been tested in usage by anyone who
actually has tried to use the current TLI standard, and thus for
a considerable while will be more proposal than reality.

If you are considering using it - fine - just do so in whole cloth,
not taking only those parts you like, which renders its potential
value as an alternate *standard* useless.

lojbab