Re: [bpfk] camxes and syllabification in zi'evla

[John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>]

And Rosta scripsit:

> Really six vowels rather than seven? What about the buffer vowel. 

That's one of the things that should have been left out.  In Loglan,
there were two dialects: in one, /y/ was realized as [@] and no buffer
was permitted; in the other, /y/ was realized as [j@] and all other
instances of [@] were epenthetic.  JCB actually required that in the
second dialect [@] be inserted at *all* points; however, no one ever
did that as far as anyone knows.

> (FWIW I'd have given /y/ the normative value [y] and /%/ the normative
> value [@], swapping the values when the phonemes are adjacent to
> /i, u/.)

Vocalic consonants were first introduced, I think to serve the role of /y/.
In post-split Loglan they came to be written doubled and to be treated
morphologically as consonant pairs (thus "ammata" is a valid brivla
whereas "amata" falls apart into "a ma ta").

But I wouldn't be happy with a front rounded vowel, given how rare they are
(as phonemes) in the world's languages.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan@ccil.org
It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was
laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds
upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply
persists from blind imitation of the past. --Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

-- 
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.