From phma@oltronics.net Fri Nov 30 21:05:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 1 Dec 2001 05:05:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 28923 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2001 05:05:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2001 05:05:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (216.189.29.235) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2001 05:05:06 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id BA0FA3C478; Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:04:08 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Reply-To: phma@oltronics.net To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] morphology Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 00:04:06 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: <4.3.2.7.2.20011130223529.00d82e30@pop.cais.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20011130223529.00d82e30@pop.cais.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <0112010004060P.25762@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Friday 30 November 2001 23:37, Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) wrote: > Given the hierarchy, there is little doubt that the algorithm will succeed > in resolving all conflicts. However, since fu'ivla wordforms are defined > in the algorithm only by what they are NOT, we do nopt have a definitive > algorithm for testing a wordform to see if it is a valid fu'ivla. We know > that "slinku'i" words fail the "slinku'i" test. We don't know what other > wordforms within brivla space are not lujvo or gismu and which do not fail > the test except by trial and error. The human process of testing words for > possible breakup is sufficiently unintuitive and subject to error, that we > simply avoid the difficulty for now, especially since type 3 fu'ivla are > good enough for everyone except Pierre %^). And whoever made up {odbenu} (I could probably figure that out by interrogating Alice's cvs log, but haven't bothered). > The classic example of this problem is the brivla "iglu". According to vlatai it is valid. An objection was raised that {iglu zbasu} is misheard as {i gluzbasu}; however, that would require a pause since {i} is stressed and precedes a three-syllable brivla. I consider VCCV as unusable, but VC/CV (e.g. {alga}, {otpi}) as usable. phma