Received: from mail-wi0-f183.google.com ([209.85.212.183]:45486)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.80.1)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBDNZFNNFVAHRBYGOSSRAKGQEFLUQMQI@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1XgEhc-0001T6-45; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:17:06 -0700
Received: by mail-wi0-f183.google.com with SMTP id z2sf415141wiv.20
        for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-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
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=nTkOPJbtNWonu6d+y1GUGl8fqE2E18RpGkGy0rtzLR0=;
        b=vgXIfapojKkiABMCK6LvsGjtBYYnsvH0jLjZVBFWLVbuxVBitnglz1z+YwjcThFNfl
         YucshV4jB0sa7Ie4Ma+vQ/602BF2MdOt3diK46NS/rSO3GMjjtX+gXCMnY3C06ZzJSoy
         Yg4TWZ2+P9ZF4Uyk1CcLNLMimw2JswPaCQq+ojKskDN/+gnoJAYIy6MrqQ2nwvb33v8P
         HbnJI1L9fvWkHaJMk3+FOHUZ0ZMLvg3AvTEr41SmsqHEO2ZUZFioXzQcKMDq9yXVRlis
         6F3pBZEkJHHAPFdB+O0Ga1YMIMCVDkJ8M6xKI73lBY2JxXxRE6ZXU+TFmd58UEoqwvRp
         /i1g==
X-Received: by 10.180.99.10 with SMTP id em10mr63592wib.20.1413818208763;
        Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.180.74.41 with SMTP id q9ls317284wiv.23.gmail; Mon, 20 Oct
 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.239.197 with SMTP id vu5mr1129572wjc.0.1413818208425;
        Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u2si397440wiw.0.2014.10.20.08.16.48
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e;
Received: by mail-wi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id h11so8255770wiw.1
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.194.185.115 with SMTP id fb19mr4645711wjc.121.1413818208314;
        Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.208] ([95.147.226.113])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q9sm9961230wix.6.2014.10.20.08.16.46
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:16:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <54452760.2090305@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 16:16:48 +0100
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120711 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [bpfk] official cmavo form
References: <f9d06e26-31b2-43ac-897e-b3a21db84dad@googlegroups.com> <CAO7tK2eCaqLe2L7wJh7FmP2CW8BkL==jtm1nBqAbvjUbDC2syQ@mail.gmail.com> <5444FEBF.10200@gmx.de> <544507CD.9050608@gmail.com> <20141020141316.GD14499@mercury.ccil.org>
In-Reply-To: <20141020141316.GD14499@mercury.ccil.org>
X-Original-Sender: and.rosta@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=pass
 (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e
 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=and.rosta@gmail.com;       dkim=pass
 header.i=@gmail.com;       dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+972099695765+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -
Content-Length: 2425

John Cowan, On 20/10/2014 15:13:
> And Rosta scripsit:
>
>> Why must Lojban have onsets and syllabification? /Cia/ is problematic
>> only if /Ci-/ must constitute an onset.
>
> It's settled that "ia" is /ja/.

Does /j/ (corresponding to orthographic <i> rather than <j>) actually exist=
? Are minimal pairs possible with /i/:/j/?

I'd propose that "ia" should be /ia/.

>> How about {a'ua}?
>
> By avoiding things like this, we keep Lojban /h/ safely ambisyllabic.
> Allowing /ahwa/ means we have to choose between coda /h/ (hard for
> anglophones and many others) and onset /hw/ (hard for most anglophones,
> who no longer have a /w/ ~ /W/ distinction).

These problems arise when {a'ua} is analysed as something other than /a'ua/=
. If Lojban has no /u/:/w/ contrast -- as the impossibility of minimal pair=
s would show -- then /ahwa/ and /awha/ are not possible analyses. I think s=
yllabification is likely an unnecessary complication, but I don't see why /=
'/ in /a'ua/ couldn't be ambisyllabic.
 =20
> We have no shortage of possible cmavo.  Let's not go toward hC or Ch
> clusters (where C =3D any consonant including /j/ and /w/).

The simplest phonological analysis of Lojban is one in which there are no c=
lusters at all. The only phonotactic rules necessary are that a C many be a=
djacent only to a V, a V may be adjacent only to a C or a glide V of a type=
 other than its own, and /%/ (or however we symbolize the buffer vowel) may=
 be adjacent only to a C.

I realize the current rules are much more complex. I'm just noting that wit=
h no detriment they could be simplified to what I've set out. (I would actu=
ally advocate slightly more restrictions on VV sequences, tho.)

>> I think Lojban already has way more phonotactic constraints than is
>> necessary...
>
> I wish we had more, but our lujvo-making machinery prevents some that
> would be really useful, like not allowing both "denbro" and "dembro".

Those are problematic only when there has been excessive syncope of /%/.
 =20
--And.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.