Message-ID: <20050822230950.40223.qmail@web81306.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:09:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <737b61f305082119404d642179@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
From: John E Clifford <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Subject: [lojban] Re: lojban phonology
Content-Length: 1513
Lines: 45

 Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is lojban phonology as underspecified as I
> think? 

Probably; phonotactics (indeed everything) is no
better specified than in CLL. Thus locational
variants in pronunciation are not specified
(except that palatalization is generally not
allowed).  So 't' may have any of the English
variants (except glottal stop -- so any alveolar
variant) and so approach the range of 'r' at the
flap end.  And so on.  So there may well be
Lojban dialects, corresponding -- at least
originally to the antive language of the speaker
(or those from whome he learned the language). 
In principle these differences can be ignored so
long as voicing and point of articulation remain
(and the individual speaker does not overlap --
't' with 'r,' say).  How this will work in
practice we won't know til we get some practice.
 
Or is there some
> restriction on the modification of consonant
> sounds in consonant
> clusters? English has a number of these
> modifications, and an English
> speaker might carry these over to lojban. For
> example, in the word
> {citka}, an English speaker will almost always
> pronounce the 't' not
> as a alveolar plosive, but as an alveolar stop.
> I'm sure there are
> other examples. Is this sort of thing to be
> avoided?


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.