la'o me. John Cowan .me cusku di'e
Gleki Arxokuna scripsit:Is it allowed to have several fui'vla that differ in the ending only?Sure. After all, we routinely have lujvo that differ in the ending only. That said, I'd avoid them.
I'd say no. lujvo don't have rafsi, so they are allowed to differ in the final vowel, but this is not true for fu'ivla.
What about rafsi for them then?There are none: that's why we have "zei".
The PEG assigns rafsi to all fu'ivla, but even if you don't like the PEG morphology, the CLL itself proposes fu'ivla rafsi for fu'ivla of the form CCV'VCV:
tci'ile -> -tci'ily-Allowing two fu'ivla to differ only in their final vowel would remove the possibility of having fu'ivla rafsi, which is quite a big cost.
Therefore, I consider all versions of berberV the same word, and the rafsi is -berberV'y-.
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i _______________________________________________ jbovlaste mailing list jbovlaste@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste