Subject: Re: [lojban] What's the logic behind Lojban's sound system?

From: Robin Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 02:15:21 +0300

On Tuesday 30 April 2002 00:01, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Monday 29 April 2002 15:57, Robin Turner wrote:
> > On Monday 29 April 2002 18:44, And Rosta wrote:
> > > #>The phonology of /'/ and /@/, where /@/ = buffer vowel is so stupid
> > > #>-- so unlike anything in natlangs -- that it is simply indefensible.
> >
> > I don't know about that. Colloquial Turkish uses a short "i" (that's an
> > English "i", not a Lojban "i"!) or occasionally "ü" to buffer foreign
> > words, e.g. "film" is often pronounced "filim" and "studyo", "sütüdyo".
>
> The buffer vowel is something used by foreigners when pronouncing Lojban,
> not by jbopre when pronouncing foreign words. The latter is usually /y/ in
> cmene; fu'ivla (which can't contain "y") add other vowels, change voicing
> or other features of consonants, etc.
>
> So would you insert "ü" or "I" as a buffer vowel? What are some Lojban
> words that are hard for Turks to pronounce?

I don't know for sure, since I don't know any native speaker Turkish 
Lojbanists. "Pure" Turkish tends not to go in for initial consonant pairs, 
except for (lojban orthography) "dj" and "tc" (which are single letters in 
Turkish). Educated Turks, who are exposed to more loan-words, generally have 
no problems with common English consonant clusters (e.g. they pronounce 
"film" as written, not as "filim"). I think it's more a question of 
unthinkingly imposing Turkish phonological rules on loan-words - the choice 
of buffering vowel seems to reflect a desire to conform to vowel harmony.

Of course Turks would have as much difficulty as omst of us do with those 
goddam syllabic "r"s!

robin.tr