guskant scripsit:
> eskua, februa, fiakre, fiesta, kuadranta, kuaidzi, madjio, matriocka,
> patriarko, reskuamata, restuatara, tiatro, tuitsku
Words like this are particularly hard for many people to articulate
clearly. For example, madjio is very close to madjo, tiatro to tcatro,
and one could easily change into the other.
> For example, {februa} will be {fe + bruua} by adding u. In this case, the
> apostrophe-method is also inapplicable because {febru'a} is in lujvo form.
No absolutely mechanical method will suffice: some of these broken fu'ivla
will have to be rebuilt. We should accept that and move on.
> If we require that ii or uu should be fully within the same word, this
> problem will not occur, though.
Do you mean that we should allow ii, uu only in the words ".ii" and ".uu"?
If so, I very much favor that idea. IMO they should never have been
allowed in Lojban or Loglan, as they can only be clearly articulated
using approximant allophones.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org
A male Jang appeared at my side. "Get a grip on yourself," he said.
"Get a grip on your graks," I suggested. --Tanith Lee, Drinking Sapphire
Wine
--
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.