From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCIj8bjBBoEVPZLkw@googlegroups.com Sun Aug 22 13:25:00 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OnH69-0005cS-7v; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:25:00 -0700 Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18sf47685wwi.16 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:50 -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:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=qIsvNv5a+yRYzHinHwYSocyV9VwVmFdyj97kl34KNzs=; b=ISMYTpyAqB4ck88MLsfmw+sAj64oHcYxgW3IBQQ/7d/ytq/rN5Mq/VpGQ99iSrTIXU MMcTETBdPehBWZzCwNnCChxMBeyGrHgH9dadv7yepTqLoisMpAiWT4jK+cNXYwOoqF+c VdTH04xC0nOj0IBBxz9h2GouVQvxP/jNkHtu4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=dDjMWgxWDbEwJRri/o40joqX8Wf9k+oteufvukHRfR82Llbu9ppY1sliCbch21kAfW nhdkpMv5Flum91dLJutHGnMwUBKBbWyTsxt9+yF5PpLz/k5kUuxUFxM7hiPvpLcJiYYO 6uzrB7kg4KA9M2274URzfIXmbAaiFBT/hK25k= Received: by 10.216.145.132 with SMTP id p4mr874292wej.20.1282508680775; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:40 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.237.165 with SMTP id y37ls1746235weq.1.p; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.87.19 with SMTP id x19mr93198wee.7.1282508680051; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.87.19 with SMTP id x19mr93196wee.7.1282508680022; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f175.google.com (mail-wy0-f175.google.com [74.125.82.175]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id v4si1908001weq.9.2010.08.22.13.24.38; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.175; Received: by wyb33 with SMTP id 33so5581543wyb.6 for ; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.157.13 with SMTP id z13mr3608143wbw.184.1282508678851; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.145.147 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Aug 2010 13:24:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 17:24:38 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Cool From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Ivo Doko wrote: > On 20 August 2010 17:35, Stela Selckiku wrote: >> {xamgrkulu} >> {zabnrkulu} >> {jikcrkulu} >> {cninrkulu} > > I don't know about you but to me the consonant clusters {mgrk}, > {bnrk}, {kcrk} and {nrk} don't seem very Lojbanic and regardless of > whether they're Lojbanic or not they're definitely a bit difficult to > pronounce... They are Lojbanic in the sense of being officially valid, but I would agree with you to their being un-Lojbanic in another sense. :) (I don't find them too difficult to pronounce though, just not nice.) > It would be near impossible to pronounce those clusters properly, > instead you'd probably say {xamgyrkulu}, {zabnyrkulu}, {jikcyrkulu} > and {cninyrkulu} anyway, so why not write it like that? fu'ivla can't have "y", but the good news is that inserting a "y" in that position can never cause ambiguity. I think one of my proposals was to allow such forms as replacement for the type-3 fu'ivla forms, and eliminate vocalic consonants altogether. mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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.