From lojban-out@lojban.org Sat Dec 07 12:49:34 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 7 Dec 2002 20:49:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 51437 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 20:49:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2002 20:49:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 20:49:34 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18KltG-0007t4-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:49:34 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18KltB-0007sl-00; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:49:29 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:49:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18Klt7-0007sc-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:49:25 -0800 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.12] by smtp.intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id AEDD693010A; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:49:33 -0500 To: Subject: [lojban] Re: Aesthetics Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:49:23 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <20021207204604.GA15906@allusion.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Declude-Sender: raganok@intrex.net [209.42.200.12] X-Note: Total weight is 0. Whitelisted X-archive-position: 3235 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: raganok@intrex.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: raganok@intrex.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 17703 >> >> >> Presumably And was indending to replace them with another letter? >> >> >> >> >Like and H or a Q, possibly pronounced like "theta"? >> >> >> >> This would be useful in, eg, translating Twain - it allows us to spell out >> >> alternative pronunciations. But in normal writing, it would only be >> >> divisive; I dislike h for ' because [h] is not an optimal pronunciation and >> >> /h/ pronounced [T] is just crazy. >> >> >Why is [h] not an optimal pronunciation for '? (Yes I know the >> >title of the thread is 'aesthetics', but you seem to be implying >> >there's some kind of reason). >> >> Because there is a greater phonic contrast between [T] and [f] or [s] than >> between [h] and [x]. >I disagree. To me, [s] sounds almost like [T]. But [x] and [h] >sound *totally* different. So, for your ear, [h] is better than [s]. I guess I was a bit naive to assume that everyone would be like me. I thus correct that statement: Because there is a greater phonic contrast between [T] and [f] or [s] than between [h] and [x], to me. Are we agreed that if you can actually say it, the lateral pronunciation would be more distinct? >This line of reasoning is bogus anyway though; languages can divide >their sounds however they want. Yes, but planned languages, which want to maximize their potential speaker base, should allow their speakers to make the sounds maximally distinct. It is for this reason that I applaud Lojban's multiple ' sounds, and oppose the use of h for '. Besides, ' capitalizes to h (eg in selma'o names). I think I'll start capitalizing all my ns, and watch the complaints roll in. I use a [N] pronunciation in many cases anyway... --la kreig.daNiyl. 'segu le balvi temci gi mi'o reNvi lo purci .i ga le foNxa jaNbe gi du mi' -la djimis.BYFet pygypy gubmau ckiku Nacycme: 0x22C68020