From lojban+bncCMvjp-TQBRC97fDfBBoE2WjAeQ@googlegroups.com Tue May 25 13:45:07 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OH0zh-0004zz-Hy; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:45:06 -0700 Received: by gwj18 with SMTP id 18sf4507489gwj.16 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:received:mime-version:sender :received:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=HjK8E7YgJQygG6tIfxNWVMObS2stUoHgTX0A/lAVLEM=; b=MT/THuOElYI+KyEgRMt4h7Tq97N1Gum9XNM4XM1nFIn6yGKr4bobuFZipQgvx10ws5 CyE7XSMF/XHgEcIEaDvyjlEc7oj2nDmugsORikjp3ggugbH9aoOHj8XnBBVlWD7YJAdV 0zV/pjrPeLbxVJbEBA6KkcGAgDnu0mMatA/Ow= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; b=4udSs/mpTk/d8SLKThwY36r9ogcTpDdbqstotTLc1vuAFsYvnEHcn6B0uSGGJnU+SM Gmc48HGbw8xK3vSk6AdMaJLgTurouJ4pqAkAX0AyQUxMGTQELVLEhlyzeS0qIMP2ueYD NmoHXvGLtdhdKAZ7ciX9VvH2FqXE6NdYtWhME= Received: by 10.101.175.10 with SMTP id c10mr281359anp.33.1274820285161; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:45 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.139.8 with SMTP id r8ls20960ann.7.p; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.4.9 with SMTP id g9mr2359144ani.23.1274820283943; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.4.9 with SMTP id g9mr2359143ani.23.1274820283869; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gx0-f227.google.com (mail-gx0-f227.google.com [209.85.217.227]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si669863ywh.1.2010.05.25.13.44.42; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.227 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.227; Received: by gxk27 with SMTP id 27so1625743gxk.1 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.134.13 with SMTP id l13mr9346135ann.118.1274820281342; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.100.57.18 with HTTP; Tue, 25 May 2010 13:44:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7ac5ef76-747a-4077-ac8d-bd45e0c68005@y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com> References: <3414c7b0-2a75-4cb2-99a4-0afa6458f6ba@t34g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <7ac5ef76-747a-4077-ac8d-bd45e0c68005@y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com> From: Daniel Brockman Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 22:44:21 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Named multiples To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.227 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=dbrockman@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: dbrockman@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Lindar, your reasoning is self-contradictory. If cmevla break the "phonological fluidity", which presumably is something that speakers care about (otherwise why would it be a problem?), then isn't that in itself a strong reason for people to keep coining fu'ivla and lujvo? On the other hand, if people stop coining fu'ivla and lujvo just because we allow cmevla to be used as brivla, wouldn't that imply "phonological fluidity" maybe wasn't that important after all? I'm certain that this change would increase the usage of cmevla (since it couldn't possibly decrease it). But I'm equally certain that common words would not remain as cmevla if people started getting annoyed with them. By your reasoning, stage-3 fu'ivla is an even more horrible idea, since who wants the entire language infected by these weird prefixes and r-hyphens? And what about the fact that a lujvo can be 15+ letters long? That's a pain in the ass. Who wants to go around saying {mitpavycinglepre}? No, we need to put a three-rafsi limit on lujvo, or the language will eventually turn into some monstrous German-like disaster. Finally, it's quite ironic that you, who so abhor anything that interferes with the "phonological fluidity", wants us to "just keep saying {me la}" everywhere. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.