On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Alex Burka <abu...@seas.upenn.edu> wrote:Only within cmevla, right? Otherwise you'd be able to write "tuitsku" and get two words."tuitsku" would indeed unambiguously represent two words "tu" followed by "uitsku". That's why I said that for aesthetic reasons one could also require that the ii or uu be fully within the same word. (I should also say that the V has to be a vowel, not a glide.)mu'o mi'e xorxesOn Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Jorge Llambías wrote:
--On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:08 AM, And Rosta <and....@gmail.com> wrote:I suggest that <tuitr, nitcion, pier, buenosaires> be deemed, by a general rule that I am not competent to formulate, orthographic variants of <tuuitr, nitciion, piier, buuenosaires> .The rule would be simple: CiiV <-> CiV; CuuV <-> CuV.One could also require for aesthetic reasons that the ii or uu be within a single word, although this is not strictly necessary from the point of view of unambiguity.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+...@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to bpfk...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
--
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+...@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to bpfk...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .