[lojban-beginners] Re: Reasoning for the apostrophe (Was Re: Re: proper pronunciation of apostrophe)

[Joshua Choi <joshua@choi.name>]

Oh dear, I failed to read the sentences before that part. My failure;  
thanks for the answer, though. :)

On 20 August 2009, at 9:56 PM, Minimiscience wrote:

> de'i li 20 pi'e 08 pi'e 2009 la'o fy. Joshua Choi .fy. cusku zoi  
> skamyxatra.
> > Yes, but it refers to Chapter 4, which doesn't explicitly explain the
> > reasoning. Whenever it mentions apostrophes, it's in something like  
> > "not
> > including the apostrophe" or "not counting the apostrophe". I'm only
> > guessing, but it sort of seems like the reasoning that "h" is  
> > represented
> > by the apostrophe is to emphasize that it doesn't count as a letter  
> > in a
> > lot of morphological rules. Is this right?
> .skamyxatra
>
> Yes, that's essentially what the quoted passage says.  Using a  
> letter of the
> Latin alphabet in a system in which it virtually isn't a letter,  
> despite being
> surrounded by other Latin letters which are treated as full letters,  
> was
> expected to be potentially too confusing.
>
> mu'omi'e .kamymecraijun.
>
> --
> genai loi pruce gi po'o loi se pruce cu cenba