Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::236 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::236;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5660b66f-68e1-4e9c-b4ce-1713a7bf1491@googlegroups.com>
References: <b3b7d9e9-570d-474a-88f0-a05dd5c1f1c8@googlegroups.com>
	<548AC3CB.7090403@gmx.de>
	<CACf3dPmTjTFDu6XSizag0N_-in_tqPjz-K4qhhhPBh2hpbAnTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<580B9AB84B34485AB4139B921C46CF42@gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPmuHy-wJDBhd=LKT3MscWiUW9S_+WH6H7Lrat-aY-YPQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<3ED463A548E74A53BD8F2ECEF0C620F8@gmail.com>
	<14FDADF47D7841A39D612894E81CC89B@gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPnh34=k0Ea78Aej+T9SUak4OdB=M-OcL5DY+1xLiPN9ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<20141214025736.GB19927@mercury.ccil.org>
	<CACf3dP=rO4GXPpKuAW22ZtZ9T0rt4drQGn1JucojB_moP9BZhg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20141214190350.GD29313@mercury.ccil.org>
	<CACf3dPkhW5upoj+wXWbdVqovhZw2FtG2xcUcBkmJ4dP-rRjBBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2emCtHOCBQBtgDWuGx70vnBotX0Cbq9WCstcp7scx6=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkzzbPCTTMvkhywgU2KVOHbuFcDH_SHWxnXpUK2tXhZnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5660b66f-68e1-4e9c-b4ce-1713a7bf1491@googlegroups.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 11:44:54 +0000
Message-ID: <CACf3dPnCyyKUaedusZTLVO3Oza-hao=USjysQS0YtKFwh5kizA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] official cmavo form
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011836aacb7411050a903c00
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -
Content-Length: 4755

--089e011836aacb7411050a903c00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 19 Dec 2014 01:57, "guskant" <gusni.kantu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Currently, "2. disallow CgV in cmevla/fu'ivla/ma'ovla" is predominant.
>
>
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kJLBvjkoDpmvA9vJS_lf8SpCYAZvY4bMx1pj8uhWqRs/viewanalytics
>
>
>
> As a supporter of "1.3.1. allow CgV in cmevla, disallow it in
fu'ivla/ma'ovla", I make a comment here:
>
> CgV in cmevla does not affect lexical analysis, while that in
fu'ivla/ma'ovla does. Disallowing CgV in cmevla is very strong restriction.
It affects not only traditional names like {nitcion}, or popular names like
{tuitr}, but also a standard of lojbanization of words of natural
languages. CgV in cmevla sometimes makes things easy. For example, many
Chinese names have CgV-like phoneme strings. Chinese "Huan", "Han" and "Hu
An" are distinguished from each other. If CgV is disallowed in cmevla, it
will be difficult to find out a reasonable standard of lojbanization of
them.

I'd be in favour of (3), defining CGV as equivalent to CGGV (the same G in
each case). The equivalence is certainly orthographic; I can't say if it's
also phonological, because there is no credible consensus analysis of
Lojban phonology. Any potential phonetic contrast between CGV & CGGV is
feeble, and hence a phonological contrast between them is undesirable.

This then allows CGV in cmevla. Whether it allows CGV in other sorts of
word depends entirely and independently on whether words can begin with GV,
which would be a matter for a different poll.

--And.

-- 
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 email 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.

--089e011836aacb7411050a903c00
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On 19 Dec 2014 01:57, &quot;guskant&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gusni.kantu=
@gmail.com">gusni.kantu@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt; Currently, &quot;2. disallow CgV in cmevla/fu&#39;ivla/=
ma&#39;ovla&quot; is predominant.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<a href=3D"https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kJLBvjkoDpmvA9vJS_lf8SpCYAZ=
vY4bMx1pj8uhWqRs/viewanalytics"> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kJLBvjkoD=
pmvA9vJS_lf8SpCYAZvY4bMx1pj8uhWqRs/viewanalytics</a><br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; As a supporter of &quot;1.3.1. allow CgV in cmevla, disallow it in fu&=
#39;ivla/ma&#39;ovla&quot;, I make a comment here:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; CgV in cmevla does not affect lexical analysis, while that in fu&#39;i=
vla/ma&#39;ovla does. Disallowing CgV in cmevla is very strong restriction.=
 It affects not only traditional names like {nitcion}, or popular names lik=
e {tuitr}, but also a standard of lojbanization of words of natural languag=
es. CgV in cmevla sometimes makes things easy. For example, many Chinese na=
mes have CgV-like phoneme strings. Chinese &quot;Huan&quot;, &quot;Han&quot=
; and &quot;Hu An&quot; are distinguished from each other. If CgV is disall=
owed in cmevla, it will be difficult to find out a reasonable standard of l=
ojbanization of them.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I&#39;d be in favour of (3), defining CGV as equivalent to C=
GGV (the same G in each case). The equivalence is certainly orthographic; I=
 can&#39;t say if it&#39;s also phonological, because there is no credible =
consensus analysis of Lojban phonology. Any potential phonetic contrast bet=
ween CGV &amp; CGGV is feeble, and hence a phonological contrast between th=
em is undesirable.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">This then allows CGV in cmevla. Whether it allows CGV in oth=
er sorts of word depends entirely and independently on whether words can be=
gin with GV, which would be a matter for a different poll.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">--And.</p>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;BPFK&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bpfk-list=
+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:bpfk-list@googlegrou=
ps.com">bpfk-list@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list">ht=
tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--089e011836aacb7411050a903c00--