Subject: Re: [lojban] Fu'ivla diphthongs was: Official Statement- LLG Board approves new baseline policy

From: Pierre Abbat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 21:22:28 -0500

On Friday 29 November 2002 21:00, Robert LeChevalier wrote:
> It is NOT that "ua" is not permitted in a fu'ivla (I can't specifically
> recall a prohibition, at least), but that it is not clear that kuarka,
> ku,arka, and ku'arka can be considered as *different* words because of the
> alternate orthography (which would be unusable if we allowed all VV's to
> exist in both diphthong and non-diphthong forms).

As I understand it, in standard orthography, commas make no difference to 
word identity, e.g. spatrkinua=spat,r,kinu,a, even though they are accented 
differently. So kuarka=ku,arka but kuarka<>ku'arka.

In fu'ivla, SO ia-iu and ua-uu are unchanged in alternate orthography, and SO 
i'a-i'u and u'a-u'u are AO i,a-i,u and u,a-u,u. So:
SO kuarka = AO kuarka
SO ku'arka = AO ku,arka
SO ku,arka = AO kuarka , since the comma is ignored in SO.

phma