[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bpfk] extended rafsi and a tosmabru/slinku'i boondoggle


On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 5:20 PM, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org> wrote:
Jorge Llambías scripsit:

> Well, if we throw away rafsi but keep the look-and-feel of brivla, we can
> replace the current 35 rules that deal with brivla with just a single one:

Of course, that puts us back before the 1983 GMR, the purpose of which
was to reduce the number of colliding lujvo.  It's still possible to
have semantic collisions between lujvo coined by different people to mean
different things, but at least they are all decomposable in the same way.

Yep. An intermediate possibility would be to keep the rafsi system, but discard the slinku'i exception. That would make the rules for brivla recognition much simpler, so that for example slinku'i and sporte would be valid fu'uvla, at the cost of requiring "y" in some more CVC- initial lujvo. So for example, the first two lujvo that would be affected from the jbovlaste alphabetical list are backemselrerkru, which would have to become bacykemselrerkru, and badjamblo, which would have to become badyjamblo, because ckemselrerkru and djamblo would be valid fu'ivla. The tosmabru rule would also become simpler: -y- would be required whenever the final consonant of an unstressed CVC- initial rafsi formed a valid onset when combined with the onset of the following rafsi. No need to examine the lujvo all the way to the first y or the end of the word, as is the case now.

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.