Received: from mail-lb0-f186.google.com ([209.85.217.186]:44714) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Y2QWf-000368-OZ; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:24 -0800 Received: by mail-lb0-f186.google.com with SMTP id w7sf222419lbi.3; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type: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; bh=fYIIzo1Rm0azA41cROrDdK61l70I7u6/H33yn8zPLiI=; b=vVaF5xhxEX617hYV+/kYb3idH/tgId4WCExCyJTdk8VnQta4mE1ZMjbvoqBdOjjhTe w1pFh0M5LVqWbR81HYP/p8PxfivgFhYZfChbMXSccIizbrlgLCksE6iyVh/fELNRs4uz 2d5CoHWFW/r2l6SLlPhou5S0eYJ3qrLLq0E9AXO9d2k1RKZDW2y8DYyWO3eueuhV7NPZ 8rrd38yMdIPwiKNV6fgfdlwEdBDEelQ8EY8sEx3euUyk0Kqwip4158Yqx5DrAanHjO6M 66kZhnFsxt5HzXKaP1Gti5Eqn14E5LqgifUZ/ieYKYfK38fCvccAu5SPBe6vUp2AFjRx MwLQ== X-Received: by 10.180.19.130 with SMTP id f2mr49935wie.7.1419106874330; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:14 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.73.167 with SMTP id m7ls363783wiv.36.gmail; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.82.34 with SMTP id f2mr1203398wiy.1.1419106873971; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-x22e.google.com (mail-lb0-x22e.google.com. [2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id mu9si617514lbc.0.2014.12.20.12.21.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e; Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 10so2310548lbg.5 for ; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.156.169 with SMTP id wf9mr14124790lbb.85.1419106873842; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.78.9 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 12:21:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <603e27d5-4132-4fe0-84bb-23815fa64a5d@googlegroups.com> References: <603e27d5-4132-4fe0-84bb-23815fa64a5d@googlegroups.com> Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 17:21:13 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] Re: official cmavo form From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c240b01d21ca050aab915e X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - Content-Length: 5398 --001a11c240b01d21ca050aab915e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Jacob Errington wrote: > My stance on this issue, which I believe is a decent compromise between > the different issues raised in this thread (which I will not take the time > to respond to individually) is that glides should be permitted, but be > non-clustering. > > What I mean by "non-clustering" is that clusters of the form /Cg/ should > be forbidden. In other words, the occurrance of Cg means a syllable break > must occur between the C and g. > The only thing with that is that it gives strings that look like they might be words but are not, such as "sepia" or "akua", unless Cg is considered a consonant cluster as required by brivla. If not, "sepia" would be phonotactically fine but morphologically unanalyzable. We already have some such things (namely slinku'i, isloated CCV rafsi, and a few things involving "y") but it's not nice. > Also, since this proposal effectively considers /j/ and /w/ as consonants, > I think I should clarify that I would be opposed to considering words such > as "uitki" to be gismu, simply on the basis that expanding the gismu space > should be done with more care. We may wish to consider them gismu at a > later time, but that would require changing words such as "uitki" that do > not deserve to be gismu. (I'm not specifically saying uitki is undeserving > of a gismu. That's a separate debate, unrelated to the one at hand.) For > now they should still be considered zi'evla/fu'ivla. > camxes considers them fu'ivla, which means that "brauitki" is another fu'ivla and not a lujvo. The "barda zei uitki" lujvo being "bardyuitki". mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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. --001a11c240b01d21ca050aab915e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Jacob Errington <= nictytan@gmail.com<= /a>> wrote:
My= stance on this issue, which I believe is a decent compromise between the d= ifferent issues raised in this thread (which I will not take the time to re= spond to individually) is that glides should be permitted, but be non-clust= ering.

What I mean by "non-clustering" is that clusters of= the form /Cg/ should be forbidden. In other words, the occurrance of Cg me= ans a syllable break must occur between the C and g.
=

The only thing with that is that it gives strings that = look like they might be words but are not, such as "sepia" or &qu= ot;akua", unless Cg is considered a consonant cluster as required by b= rivla. If not, "sepia" would be phonotactically fine but morpholo= gically unanalyzable. We already have some such things (namely slinku'i= , isloated CCV rafsi, and a few things involving "y") but it'= s not nice.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
Also, since this proposal effectively considers /j/ and /w/ as= consonants, I think I should clarify that I would be opposed to considerin= g words such as "uitki" to be gismu, simply on the basis that exp= anding the gismu space should be done with more care. We may wish to consid= er them gismu at a later time, but that would require changing words such a= s "uitki" that do not deserve to be gismu. (I'm not specifica= lly saying uitki is undeserving of a gismu. That's a separate debate, u= nrelated to the one at hand.) For now they should still be considered zi= 9;evla/fu'ivla.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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 ht= tp://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--001a11c240b01d21ca050aab915e--