From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Nov 28 10:47:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 28 Nov 2001 18:47:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 83330 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2001 18:47:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m5.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 28 Nov 2001 18:47:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Nov 2001 18:47:29 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Wed, 28 Nov 2001 18:23:21 +0000 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:01:14 +0000 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:00:49 +0000 To: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] stress, capitalization & audiovisual isomorphism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin >>> 11/26/01 10:09pm >>> #arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: #> #Indeed, it would be: specifically, it would cease to be an isomorphism, #> #since would sometimes mean [@] and sometimes [j]. #>=20 #> but -adjacent-to-V would always mean [@] and -not-adjacent #> to-V would always mean [j]. And vice versa from sound to spelling. #> So why is this less of an isomorphism than -in-penult-syllable #> =3D stressed-[V] and -not-in-penult =3D unstressed-[V]? # #Hard to argue the point, except to say that the isomorphism would likely f= ail=20 #at the phonemic level, since the y-glide is an allophone of /i/, not /y/. = =20 #And there is the added glyph w for something that is only an allophone of= =20 #/u/. On the other hand, it gets rid of ', an unsightly object, which=20 #nonetheless represents a real sound and not an allophone of anything #(exc= ept non-juncture). So, as Chao would say, we could reanalyse the=20 #sound system, making the ' be an automatic reflex of vowel-vowel contact=20 #when glottal stop was absent. But then we would always have to write in=20 #glottal stops (or maybe just be more careful about spaces). While we're a= t=20 #it, why not make the glide an allophone of /y/ -- and make w also apply t= o=20 #the buffering vowel yer, allowing one to write out dialects? If we are going to discuss hypothetical alternative orthographies, these are rather appealing suggestions. for the buffer vowel would work (i.e. be unambiguous) even if we stayed agnostic about the phonemic analysi= s. --And.