[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban] Re: The phonotactics of cmevla



On 11/27/07, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
> On Friday 23 November 2007 11:10, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> > What I have done in the current version of the PEG morphology is to
> > allow any string of phonemes for names in general (maintaining pairwise
> > acceptability), but I also created a subclass of names "jbocme" for
> > properly Lojbanic names, which allows only those names that consist
> > purely of normal Lojban syllables.
>
> I think that this is a good idea, as my previous idea of allowing the last
> syllable to have an extra onset at the end, and the first syllable to
> optionally have a coda at the beginning, was a bit ugly. However I
> consider "-rk" and "-nk" to be valid codas, or more generally, any syllabic
> consonant followed by another consonant that doesn't violate the adjacent
> consonant rules. Using that rule, {mark} is a jbocme but {marks} isn't.

That would go together with the issue of "fas-xo-lark-to"-like fu'ivla. If they
are allowed, then {mark} would be called jbocme.

> This, however, would demote cmevla formed by deleting the last vowel of a
> gismu to not-quite-Lojbanic status if they end in two non-syllabic
> consonants, such as {resp}. How about allowing one extra consonant at the
> end?

I'd rather not, but since this would now be just a matter of classification, it
doesn't really matter much.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.