[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban] Re: Baseline statement
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:48:30 -0500
From: Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: Baseline statement
Pointing out that getting special meetings to happen is difficult is
not part of the solution, it's part of the precipitate. If this means
the next members meeting needs to rejig the bylaws, well then, it'll
rejig the bylaws. As has been promised to happen for the past decade.
I think the notion that a Loglan transliteration (described as
'oddball' in CLL!) constrains Lojban phonotactics is ludicrous.
Saying that anything oddball mentioned in CLL is more authoritative
than anything oddball not in CLL (for example, that we are obliged to
follow Eric Raymond's Tengwar rather than elrond's) is not much less
ludicrous.
I know what Lojban phonology is, and it is that the sequence VV is
distinct from V'V: apostrophe is a phoneme, and comma isn't. That's
true of .i'o and .io, and I see nothing in the phonology to say it's
not true of ti'o and tio.
Besides, now that I've read the blasted thing, John had anticipated
this anyway:
Lojban sruti'o = Loglan sruti,o
Lojban srutio = Loglan srutio
The comma is a phoneme in Loglan transliteration, which does much of
the work of the Lojban apostrophe. Therefore, sruti'o and srutio are
distinct in Lojban, and this is not annulled in the Loglan
transliteration, which also renders them distinctly. Therefore the
difference between the two remains legit.
Goddammit. All this rigmarole because you misremembered the
transliteration. For shame.
###
ki egeire arga ta sthqia ta qlimmena;#Nick Nicholas, French/Italian
san ahdoni pou se nuxtia anoijiata # University of Melbourne
thn wra pou kelahda epnixth, wimena! # nickn@unimelb.edu.au
stis murwdies kai st' anqismena bata.# http://www.opoudjis.net
-- N. Kazantzakhs, Tertsines: Xristos#
To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/