Re: [lojban] stress, capitalization & audiovisual isomorphism

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/23/2001 2:25:54 PM Central Standard Time, a.rosta@ntlworld.com writes:

(NB Remember that an unambiguous orthography is not necessarily
an audiovisually isomorphic one.)

The result would look disgusting, but if the AVI requirement
is suspended in this instance then AVI violation would not
be a legitimate objection to other orthographies that, for
instance, get rid of the apostrophe.

This depends upon the details of the function involved in the isomorphy.  Presumably one complex enough into include features like penultimate-syllable-ness would make (in this case) unambiguous and isomorphic the same.  The problem with dropping apostrophes is -- if you mean all of them -- that then you don't even have unambiguous, and -- if you mean just the predictable ones -- that you still have a whole lot of essential ones left.  The remaining stress marks are rare and (so far as I can tell) never essential: we may mispronounce a name, but not interfere with its referential function any worse than our urrent errors do.