Re: [lojban] Re: Question about Lojbanized Name in Unix/Linux

On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Alexander Kozhevnikov <alexkoz@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014, Jorge Llambías wrote:

BTW, a.lek,san,dr and ko,jev,ni,kov are the default syllables with the
camxes morphology, so in your case you are not even showing a non-standard
syllable break.

[and]

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014, 'Wuzzy' via lojban wrote:

Another workaround would be to simply drop the commas altogether, but
then you would have to live with a slightly different syllabation.

Can you two help me resolve/reconsile these two statements? Seems like .xorxes. is saying the default syllabation is equivalent to mine, but .uuZIT. is saying dropping the commas would make it slightly different. I'm guessing the answer lies in me understanding the meaning of "camxes morphology" and if that means it's different vs. some alternative morphology or something?

The camxes morphology is not official (yet) and there is no official rule for syllabation. English tends to prefer closed syllables, so it may well be that English speakers will tend to say al,eks,and,r instead of a,lek,san,dr but it doesn't really matter much, since the difference (which I can hardly hear anyway) doesn't affect the meaning in Lojban.

Did you mean for that to be written "a.lek,san,dr", or am I correctly guessing that that was a typo and you meant "a,lek,san,dr"?

Yes, sorry.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014, Jorge Llambías wrote:

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Another question: Isn't the whole point of "mu'o" to indicate that the statement/message is over, therefore doesn't having words after it go against its intended purpose, strictly speaking? In a written medium like this it obviously doesn't matter (at least assuming I 'understand' email and also have some notion of the typical stuff email replies and mailing lists end up leaving in the email body), but if we were talking in real time I would hope that I could treat "mu'o" as a cue that I could start talking and not overlap your statements. Thoughts?

I've been asked this before. You can't really take the word "mu'o" as the end of the message because "mu'o" is in selma'o COI, which means it's the head of a clause like "mu'o [name] [do'u]". If you start talking before the other speaker ends the clause you would be interrupting anyway. A string of COIs can also head a vocative clause. It's the whole clause "mu'o mi'e xorxes [do'u]" that indicates, among other things, that the message is over. Those who think that "mu'o" by itself indicates the end of a message are thinking of it as if it was in selma'o UI, but it's actually in selma'o COI, so you have to wait for the end of the clause for the message to be completed. (And the end-of-clause word, "do'u", is almost always elided, so you shouldn't be waiting too long before assuming it won't come either.)

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014, 'Wuzzy' via lojban wrote:

.a,lekSANdr.koJEVni,kov.

“.a,lekSANdr.” can be also written as “.a,leksandr.”. By default, the
stress is on the syllable before the last one, in this case, “san”. If
your word uses the default pronounciation, you do not have to
capitalize it. Having the stress on that syllable is also preferred.

*Nod* I was aware about that second-from-last rule. It makes more sense why I chose to capitalize it anyway in context of my initial goals+ignorance:

That's not exactly right though. Consonantal syllables like "dr" (and also syllables with "y" as the nucleus) don't count for the penultimate stress rule, so the default stress is unfortunately a,lék,san,dr. If you were to change it to "aleksander" it would get the desired default stress. You could use "aleksander kojevnkov" to get default stress for both cmevla. In any case, stress is free in cmevla, so people could still place it in the "wrong" place and be saying the same name.

mu'o mi'e xorxes