From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Sat Feb 10 10:49:15 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id KAA11361 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 10:49:12 -0500 Message-Id: <199602101549.KAA11361@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 70EA3DB3 ; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 10:17:27 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 10:15:43 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: loglan rapprochement orthography To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1495 >Can one mix the two standards? E.g. use "ao" rather than "au", but "x" >rather than "x"? That is specifically what we did NOT want. It was a way to make our texts look just like JCB's texts and thus eliminate a reported problems that he has with the aestehtic appearance of Lojban block text. It was NOT seriously intended as a "better" way to do things. Of the alternatives, only the doubled vocalic consonants is something I would even consider as a standalonechange, since it reflects a legitimate objection to Lojban orthography - a fear that vocalics are so phonetically different from their non-syllabic counterparts that a phonemic difference could arise in the community (there is not one designed in, of course). >Syllabic r l m n only occurs in cmevla and fuivla, right? They can occur in lujvo, or rather r and n can, as the hyphen after an initial CVV rafsi. >On the whole I prefer this standard to the standard standard, but I'm >a bit worried by "ao" - that's more than a matter of orthography, for >it appears to be saying "here is a /o/" where the standard standard >says "here is a /u/". Take it up with JCB - he insists, in the face of linguistic convention, that the au diphthong is really an ao diphthong. However you represent it, it is the same sound, which I am sure in IPA would continue to be represented with a 'u'. But if we allowed piecemeal adoption of the alternative, we would satisfy neither JCB nor LLG. lojbab