Re: [lojban] morphology

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/30/2001 4:02:13 PM Central Standard Time, thinkit8@lycos.com writes:

is it true that the lojban morphology is exaustively proven?  that
is, can it be shown that when following the morphology rules, audio
visual isomorphism is assured?  i was under the impression that it
wasn't, and this was what was holding up cultural fu'ivla.

furthurmore, can it be proven within reasonable limits, such as not
allowing fu'ivla?

I'm not sure I understand the question, which seems off thinkit's usual points.  The audiovisual isomorphism is trivially assured regardless of what happens with fu'ivla. Questions about about unique word segmentation or morpheme segmentation are more likely to be problems with any complex word forms. And checking out the possible ways that things can go wrong is probably what is holding up (if anything still is) approval of a variety of fu'ivla forms.