From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Jan 13 07:58:19 2005
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 27872 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2005 15:58:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
  by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2005 15:58:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134)
  by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Jan 2005 15:58:18 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1Cp7GO-0001Zy-Iw
	for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:51:56 -0800
Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1Cp7Fw-0001ZN-A8; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:51:28 -0800
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:51:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fysh.org
	([83.170.75.51] helo=bowl.fysh.org ident=mail)
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24)
	(Exim 4.34)
	id 1Cp7Fk-0001ZE-CB
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:51:16 -0800
Received: from zefram by bowl.fysh.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Cp7Ff-00056V-00
	for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:51:11 +0000
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:51:11 +0000
Message-ID: <20050113155111.GA31005@fysh.org>
References: <737b61f305011121232b29e043@mail.gmail.com> <20050112122014.42747.qmail@web41906.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20050112122014.42747.qmail@web41906.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-archive-position: 9251
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: zefram@fysh.org
X-list: lojban-list
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 64.81.49.134
X-eGroups-From: Zefram <zefram@fysh.org>
From: Zefram <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: zefram@fysh.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: pronunciation with cmavo and brivla
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790
X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 23637

Jorge Llambías wrote:
>Maybe something like {RE. SPAti} would have been a better example.
>It is not clear whether {RESPAti} should break as {re spati}
>or as {respa ti}, as in both cases the brivla has a stressed 
>penultimate syllable.

It *is* clear, because /RESPA/ is not a valid pronunciation of {respa}.
All non-penultimate syllables in a brivla must be unstressed.

The ambiguity occurs with, for example, /LOkreBUKpu/, which could be
divided into words as either {lo krebukpu} or {lokre bukpu}.

-zefram