[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Re: citri lo glibau
On 10/28/05, Adam COOPER <adamgarrigus@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/28/05, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think {o,a} or {e,o} fit with Lojban
> > phonotactics. They won't be allowed if my proposed
> > phonology becomes official. A possible form for those
> > names would be {komfo'amonan} and {bE'ouulf}.
>
> Your proposal would pretty much make the comma obsolete, then, right?
Yes. The comma is already optional though. No two words can differ
by a comma. The comma can at most indicate a preferred
pronounciation, but a word with or without the comma is
the same word. At least that's the official rule. This causes
some problems though: Is {stra,i} a valid fu'ivla, for instance?
> Oy. mi
> na djica lo nu za'u re'u finti lo jbocme be vo'a kei vau zo'o .i zo'o nai
> pe'i mi jimpe lo se stidi be do
What's the source/meaning of komfo,amonan?
> > I also dislike irregular stress, so I would choose {beuulf}
> > or {be'ouulf} instead of {bE'ouulf}, but this is an even more
> > personal preference).
>
> Do you dislike it in Spanish as well?
No, but one of the attractions of Lojban is its regularity. In this
case the dislike is more ideological than anything else though.
mu'o mi'e xorxes