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

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

2014-10-25 19:48 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

However, in general I don't see any problems with pronouncing {mastla}.

Why {mastra} is a fine brivla but {mastla} should not be (morphological classes apart)?

Because "tr" is a valid initial, while "tl" isn't. I wouldn't have a problem with making "tl" a valid initial, whereas I'm not happy with making "st" a valid coda.

Why? What's wrong with it?

It's too heavy. Core lojban words (cmavo/gismu/lujvo) don't have double-consonant codas.

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.