On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 06:25:36PM -0500, Michal Wallace wrote:
> I believe the issue here is that "ue" is not a valid lojban dipthong,
> whereas "ai" is.. If "ue" isn't a dipthong, is must be two syllables,
> and therefore the same as bu,e or bu'e.. But "bai" sounds like "bye",
> not "ba ee", so if you want "ba ee" you need a comma or apostrophe.
So this raises a new question, should we treat any vowel pair that is
not a valid diphthong as though it has a hidden comma in it?
ai, au, ei and oi would always have to be left as they are.
Others (aa,ae,ao,ea,ee,eo,eu,oa,oe,oo,ou) _could_ be automatically
treated as though they have a comma (==apostrophe). But is this
entertained by the baseline?
The remainder (the 10 starting with "i" or "u") are more tricky, because
they are already valid when used stand-alone as cmavo, or within fu'ivla
or cmene. So I guess the question is : in a word that would be a lujvo
had the pair been "ai" instead, or a cmavo starting with a consonant,
does the baseline treat these 10 pairs treated as though they have a
comma (=apostrophe) in them? i.e. could the word jbofi'e be shortened
to jbofie, on the basis that "ie" is invalid in a lujvo so the hidden
comma (=apostrophe) can be re-introduced without ambiguity?