From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Dec 08 17:57:18 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 9 Dec 2002 01:57:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 80009 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 01:57:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Dec 2002 01:57:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 01:57:18 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18LDAb-0001si-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:57:17 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LDAV-0001sG-00; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:57:11 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:57:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mxout3.netvision.net.il ([194.90.9.24]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18LDAQ-0001oN-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2002 17:57:06 -0800 Received: from default ([62.0.146.57]) by mxout3.netvision.net.il (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 0.8 (built Jul 12 2002)) with SMTP id <0H6T00CQDXE9HO@mxout3.netvision.net.il> for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 03:56:35 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 03:58:29 +0200 Subject: [lojban] Re: [h] (was: RE: Re: Aesthetics To: "lojban-list@lojban.org" Message-id: <0H6T00CQEXE9HO@mxout3.netvision.net.il> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Foxmail 4.1 [eg] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 3330 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: araizen@cs.huji.ac.il Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Adam Raizen From: Adam Raizen Reply-To: araizen@cs.huji.ac.il X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 17798 de'i li 2002-12-08 ti'u li 22:07:00 la'o zoi. And Rosta .zoi cusku di'e >Adam: >> de'i li 2002-12-07 ti'u li 22:47:00 la'o zoi. Craig .zoi cusku di'e >> >If it meant "don't use it" it wouldn't have said you could. If your listener >> >finds [T] hard, don't use [T]. But if your listener finds [h] hard, don't >> >use [h]. Or if your listener is like most listeners and can understand >> >either, use whichever. But don't use an orthography that assumes one >> >> I suspect that most listeners will be able to understand either/all, but >> would find anything other than [h] needlessly distracting, and in general >> you have to concentrate quite a bit to understand spoken lojban anyway, so >> there's no sense in adding a distraction > >In a sense, it is desirable to use [T] for precisely this reason: if >[T] is allowed by the baseline/design but proscribed by convention, >then we we end up with convention that contravenes the baseline by >prescribing a range of usage narrower than what the baseline permits. >We can generalize this futher to such things as use of the buffer >vowel, use of non-'SVO' bridi, and so forth. That is, nonnormative >usage is to be encouraged, so that in these early days of usage we >don't set in stone conventions narrower than the baseline. Some nonnormative usage permitted by CLL might be desirable, and some seems to have no use except to permit as many possibilities as possible, without having a good reason for why the additional possibilities are desirable. I don't see any purpose to allowing variants for .y'y., except to allow as many possibilities as possible, especially since I cannot possibly imagine [h] and [T] as allophones. I consider using any sound other than [h] for .y'y. to be poor style. mu'o mi'e .adam.