Re: [lojban] Re: "la" rule

[Yanis Batura <ybatura@mail.ru>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:30:25 -0500
Subject: [lojban] Re: "la" rule

> People have made the error the other way too. I was looking at Wikipedia 
> and saw an article [[vlydimir.lenin]]. If the "la", "lai", "la'i", or 
> "doi" is preceded by a consonant, its presence does not invalidate the 
> name, e.g. {blabruk}.
 
> As to {malak}, the part after "la" is less than a syllable. Probably he 
> didn't realize that you have to break everywhere a vowel is followed by 
> a consonant, including the last one. A single consonant is a valid 
> cmevla, such as {r}, the "god of hesitation". That would explain 
> overlooking {laitl} also; {tl} has no vowel. But then neither does {clsn}.
 
> The "la" rule is still a lot simpler than validating fu'ivla, which 
> requires doing slinku'i tests and checking for lujvo.

I strongly doubt that you will coin and verify new stage 4 fu'ivla in realtime speech. The situation is different with the {la} rule when untrained people frequently let slip those nasty {la}s to cmene.

mi'e .ianis