From lojbab@xxxxxx.xxxx Sat Jan 9 12:43:50 1999 X-Digest-Num: 40 Message-ID: <44114.40.143.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 15:43:50 -0500 From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" From: "=?us-ascii?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" >cu'u la lojbab >>xrvatska itself would seem to be a valid type 4 fu'ivla - I don't see any >>obvious way that the beginning consonat cluster could break up. > >It is not valid because xrv- is not a permissible initial consonant >cluster. Checking the fu'ivla rules, it seems that you are correct - each pair in a cluster of more than 2 must be a permissible initial and rv is not such. It would absorb any immediately preceding cmavo to form >a different fu'ivla. I do not believe that this is a stated criterion against a fu'ivla. The rule ias that if it is preceded by a cmavo it must not break up into a lujvo (or a lujvo plus). If a longer fu'ivla can be interpreted as a cmavo plus shorter fu'ivla, the latter would be the interpretation, as I understand the rules so that no absorption is possible. But lujvo-based do take precedence over fu'ivla based ones.