Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 34.195.253.206 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=34.195.253.206;
Subject: Re: [bpfk] Officially updating "Complete Lojban Language" grammar
 book. An official LLG proposal passed. Your help needed.
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
References: <391988c7-80ac-45c1-9549-8c22ebf6a113@googlegroups.com>
 <20190807173307.GL11404@nvg.org>
 <CAO7tK2dgTTYOqgK0gicW6D7SScsaT4JEc3Z8LAef89HK66c7LA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Message-ID: <7062992b-d2f3-ef76-7081-d1ca919b04c2@lojban.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 08:08:38 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2dgTTYOqgK0gicW6D7SScsaT4JEc3Z8LAef89HK66c7LA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -3.0
X-Spam_score_int: -29
X-Spam_bar: ---
Content-Length: 1967

On 8/7/2019 6:31 PM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas wrote:
>=20
>     It is suggested to replace:
>      =C2=A0 =C2=A0It is illegal to add a hyphen at a place that is not re=
quired by
>     this
>      =C2=A0 =C2=A0algorithm.
>     with:
>      =C2=A0 =C2=A0It is possible to optionally add an y-hyphen between th=
e
>     consonants of any
>      =C2=A0 =C2=A0permissible consonant pair e.g. for stylistic purposes =
or for
>     the ease of
>      =C2=A0 =C2=A0pronunciation.
>=20
>=20
> I don't have the full context, but I assume the "y" would be permitted=20
> betwen the consonants of adjacent rafsi, and not between the consonants=
=20
> of any consonant pair at all, otherwise the morphology gets broken ("to=
=20
> smabru" cannot be pronounced "to symabru" for example).


My opinion, for what it is worth (I don't have a veto), is that if this=20
is an actual change to the morphology as it was defined fora couple of=20
decades, then the fact that Jorge has to raise such questions means that=20
the proposal was not specified completely enough to be properly debated,=20
much less decided.

Especially knowing that Jorge could read any recorded=20
discussion/proposal in Lojban, unlike many of the rest of us (including=20
Nora who did much of the later work and explication of morphology issues).

I also don't recall any mention of this as a proposal approved by byfy,=20
and reported to the members or the Board by the byfy jatna

This proposal should not be incorporated into CLL without a proper=20
documentation, discussion and decision.  There is no evidence that such=20
has taken place.

lojbab

--=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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bpfk-list/7062992b-d2f3-ef76-7081-d1ca919b04c2%40lojban.org.