X-Digest-Num: 68
Message-ID: <44114.68.336.959273824@eGroups.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 18:02:03 -0300
From: "=?us-ascii?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@intermedia.com.ar>
Subject: Re: 'I say your name as ...'
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 336
Content-Length: 1319
Lines: 40

la djan cusku di'e

>These are plausible lujvo but not what I had in mind, which was something
>like "x1 pronounces the expression x2 with utterance x3", mapping a
>linguistic form to its phonetic realization:
>
> bau la inglic. la djan broda zoi gy. foo gy. zo fu
>
>or the like.

One problem might be that, at least in Lojban, linguistic forms and 
their phonetic realizations (or "expressions" and "utterances") are 
referred to by the same objects. You can say {mi ciska zoi gy foo gy} 
or {mi bacru zoi gy foo gy} and {zoi gy foo gy} is in one case referring 
to a linguistic form and in the other case to a phonetic realization, 
isn't it? So, if we have something like:

        zoi gy foo gy pe bau le glico cu ba'urdu'i zo fu pe bau le lojbo
        English "foo" is pronounced like Lojban "fu".

This works both to inform someone who knows Lojban how to 
pronounce the English word, or someone who knows English how 
to pronounce the Lojban word, so it is symmetrical in its two 
arguments. Both arguments seem to refer to the linguistic form 
and its phonetic realization at the same time. You want a selbri
that allows only the linguistic form in one argument and only
the phonetic realization in the other, but is there any gismu that 
makes the distinction at all?

co'o mi'e xorxes