Re: [lojban] "la" rule

[Yanis Batura <ybatura@mail.ru>]

On 13.11.2006, 18:47, MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com wrote:

> Here's another reason the "la" rule is bad. 
> As I understand it, ordinary gismu and lujvo can be used as names
> after "la".  There are 23 gismu beginning with "la-", 16 rafsi
> beginning with "la"+consonant, 5 rafsi with "la'V" and 2 rafsi
> "laV".  This means there are a lot of actual and potential words
> which act differently from any other native Lojban words, namely by
> becoming illegal when used as a cmene.  For this reason alone the "la" rule should be replaced.


I would recommend a simple yet easy to learn solution that won't distort the design of the language: saying {lua} for any occurrence of {la} in cmene, {luai} for {lai} and {duoi} for {doi}.

Examples: {la luas. vegas}, {la nelson. mandeluas}.

If you want to use a gismu or lujvo in {la} construction, then add an {s}:

{larcu} -> {la luarcus} 
{glare ladru} -> {la gluareluadrus}
etc.

For me, the possibility of saying a consonant-starting cmene after {la} without glottal stop overweighs all disadvantages of the rule. The matter of taste, of course.



mi'e .ianis