Re: Croatian as a brivla

["Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <lojbab@xxxxxx.xxxx]

At 08:23 AM 1/8/99 -0300, xorxes wrote:
>From: "=?us-ascii?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@intermedia.com.ar>
>cu'u la lojbab
>>xrvatska itself would seem to be a valid type 4 fu'ivla - I don't see any
>>obvious way that the beginning consonat cluster could break up.
>
>It is not valid because xrv- is not a permissible initial consonant
>cluster.

Checking the fu'ivla rules, it seems that you are correct - each pair in a
cluster of more than 2 must be a permissible initial and rv is not such.

It would absorb any immediately preceding cmavo to form
>a different fu'ivla.

I do not believe that this is a stated criterion against a fu'ivla. The
rule ias that if it is preceded by a cmavo it must not break up into a
lujvo (or a lujvo plus). If a longer fu'ivla can be interpreted as a cmavo
plus shorter fu'ivla, the latter would be the interpretation, as I
understand the rules so that no absorption is possible. But lujvo-based do
take precedence over fu'ivla based ones.