From lojban+bncCIycn8S8DhDP38_yBBoEB-yNpA@googlegroups.com Tue Aug 23 11:22:22 2011 Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Qvvc9-0002yE-43; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:21 -0700 Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6sf405160ywa.16 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=2Vglaop84XYV2vxKwq6HuUompEwBeNkwoGHPvAjEzks=; b=GukKTOvRmP09ksNVU4bcalz9enlX39ke54J7Agis9+aWc2KIU+p3SRXVS+Ca+vsqIQ 4J57EBD7VhInJG1DvxYSUOtwTT9iksVMQIH2Fbuevrz7I/2i7rfmKpUVOC6riiy4jHc9 MfYk9aqlQeGQCPa63vOeNVStFLLZ4kt/Xzk3w= Received: by 10.146.240.17 with SMTP id n17mr667063yah.13.1314123727538; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:07 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.73.132 with SMTP id q4ls5776619ibj.0.gmail; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.127.11 with SMTP id g11mr4562656ics.34.1314123726567; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.127.11 with SMTP id g11mr4562655ics.34.1314123726555; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com (mail-pz0-f47.google.com [209.85.210.47]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j4si778702pbi.2.2011.08.23.11.22.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.47; Received: by mail-pz0-f47.google.com with SMTP id 2so479541pzk.20 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.230.9 with SMTP id c9mr2469646wfh.342.1314123726414; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.66.130 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:22:06 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] no stressed syllables in a name From: Michael Turniansky To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: mturniansky@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mturniansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mturniansky@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd17d6ae7652404ab3045ec --000e0cd17d6ae7652404ab3045ec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 We've had this discussion before, and I absolutely disagree with xorxes (And apparently, you) that stress on cmevla does not afffect meaning. It can definitely distinguish between referents. And isn't that what meaning IS? --gejyspa On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:29 AM, tijlan wrote: > On 12 August 2011 06:16, MorphemeAddict wrote: > > OTOH, Lojban *does* have stress, so maybe a final syllable stress would > be > > less obtrusive than trying to indicate no stress at all. > > Stress is relevant only for brivla. An unstressed (but paused) cmevla > cannot be morphologically ambiguous, and the position of stress, if > any, wouldn't technically affect the word's meaning. So there is no > reason in Lojban to think or try to indicate that a certain cmevla > should have a stress on a certain syllable or none. Conversely, it > would be reasonable for Lojban to have no default stress pattern for > cmevla. A cmevla with no stress-marking would then generically > represent all of its valid stress patterns. There is no way to > indicate exactly that a cmevla should be pronounced without a stress, > but we could at least indicate that it does not exclude the unstressed > pronunciation by not marking any, by not having a default stress. (If > we had to have a default for each such phonotactic feature that isn't > morphologically, syntactically, or semantically relevant in Lojban, we > would have to have ones for tone, pitch, intonation, etc. as well.) > > -- > 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. > > -- 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. --000e0cd17d6ae7652404ab3045ec Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=A0 We've had this discussion before, and I absol= utely disagree with xorxes (And apparently, you) that stress on cmevla does= not afffect meaning.=A0 It can definitely distinguish between referents.= =A0 And isn't that what meaning IS?
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 --gejyspa


=A0
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:29 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12 August 2011 06:16, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
> OTOH, Lojb= an *does* have stress, so maybe a final syllable stress would be
> le= ss obtrusive than trying to indicate no stress at all.

Stress is relevant only for brivla. An unstressed (but paused) cm= evla
cannot be morphologically ambiguous, and the position of stress, if=
any, wouldn't technically affect the word's meaning. So there i= s no
reason in Lojban to think or try to indicate that a certain cmevla
shoul= d have a stress on a certain syllable or none. Conversely, it
would be r= easonable for Lojban to have no default stress pattern for
cmevla. A cme= vla with no stress-marking would then generically
represent all of its valid stress patterns. There is no way to
indicate = exactly that a cmevla should be pronounced without a stress,
but we coul= d at least indicate that it does not exclude the unstressed
pronunciatio= n by not marking any, by not having a default stress. (If
we had to have a default for each such phonotactic feature that isn'tmorphologically, syntactically, or semantically relevant in Lojban, wewould have to have ones for tone, pitch, intonation, etc. as well.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to t= he Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send e= mail to lojban@googlegroups.com<= /a>.
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?h= l=3Den.


--
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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--000e0cd17d6ae7652404ab3045ec--