From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:53:54 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 3497 invoked from network); 19 Sep 1997 19:46:53 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 19 Sep 1997 19:46:53 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <3.FB8F893D@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 19 Sep 1997 21:46:43 +0100 Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:30:46 -0400 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral Subject: Re: Morphology X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 657 Lines: 17 Message-ID: <-OzE8K7qFVD.A.rl.C20kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Don Wiggins wrote: > > > But it is forbidden to stress a cmavo syllable before a gismu unless you > > put a compulsory pause after the cmavo, so strong disambiguation is > > maintained. > > Is that right? In fact, is it stronger in that before gismu or lujvo there > must be a pause? How about cmene? A stressed cmavo must be separated from any following brivla by a pause. For cmene, the rule is much stronger: ANY preceding word, except for "la", "lai", "la'i", and "doi", must be separated from a following cmene by a pause. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban