[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban] Re: The phonotactics of cmevla
- To: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban] Re: The phonotactics of cmevla
- From: "Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:43:04 -0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=t9of4R4UDxLeKWgxCNowzySfrI+qrWrXbc3g/CDBq9Y=; b=HBOiFlqaxy9ffaW5c9HrOXuCqGhSpPRrdSqmcyv9u4inMzJPs6tYg3EytA1ib9IFM5dU+t82nEdFpJk9A25PDmLmOf594Z2/pptZxKPtdl0aDIOsdIMiFU7gw01yhcze1MdQOlFTYRzM4mdBV68hrKqgsFVjlpM2eqAqRNeVfAE=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=qIavRDFSXMvZGKIW7stHRF6IqJqMl31eYEeUhtXtKgp47IwXgVKp+QRz8G9+LhEwwDgt8U2jiQ4HJSFKDA1ptHq3yBkabvYju8tkUGJvKbtmklPpBTSXKUO4uAbD6q+4vDiBjkv/sGmni0F60KeHcpHyzYGEu+DYgi7jnWBEE8I=
- In-reply-to: <200711262333.50038.phma@phma.optus.nu>
- References: <925d17560711230810s556341cdh6cad83b5c2d1dd0b@mail.gmail.com> <200711262333.50038.phma@phma.optus.nu>
- Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
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.