From lojban-out@lojban.org Sat Dec 07 12:28:36 2002
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 7 Dec 2002 20:28:36 -0000
Received: (qmail 98100 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2002 20:28:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2002 20:28:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2002 20:28:36 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05)
  id 18KlYy-0007fg-00
  for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:28:36 -0800
Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain)
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 18KlYs-0007fN-00; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:28:30 -0800
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:28:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.intrex.net ([209.42.192.250])
  by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05)
  id 18KlYn-0007fE-00
  for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 12:28:25 -0800
Received: from Craig [209.42.200.12] by smtp.intrex.net
  (SMTPD32-5.05) id A9F13B700B0; Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:28:33 -0500
To: <lojban-list@lojban.org>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Aesthetics
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:28:24 -0500
Message-ID: <LPBBLNNHBOGBGAINBIEFCEEFCNAA.raganok@intrex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <20021207202246.GA15698@allusion.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Declude-Sender: raganok@intrex.net [209.42.200.12]
X-Note: Total weight is 0. Whitelisted
X-archive-position: 3231
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: raganok@intrex.net
Precedence: bulk
X-list: lojban-list
X-eGroups-From: "Craig" <raganok@intrex.net>
From: "Craig" <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: raganok@intrex.net
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790
X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out

>> >> Presumably And was indending to replace them with another letter?
>>
>> >Like and H or a Q, possibly pronounced like "theta"?
>>
>> This would be useful in, eg, translating Twain - it allows us to spell
out
>> alternative pronunciations. But in normal writing, it would only be
>> divisive; I dislike h for ' because [h] is not an optimal pronunciation
and
>> /h/ pronounced [T] is just crazy.

>Why is [h] not an optimal pronunciation for '? (Yes I know the
>title of the thread is 'aesthetics', but you seem to be implying
>there's some kind of reason).

Because there is a greater phonic contrast between [T] and [f] or [s] than
between [h] and [x].

Of course, even [T] isn't optimal if you can pronounce certain other sounds.
A Welsh ll, for example, is a lateral fricative; this is an acceptable '
sound. Since Lojban has only one lateral sound, l, which does not *need* to
be pronounced laterally, the most contrasting pronunciation would be a velar
l (like in English) and a lateral '.

I use [T], but only because I can't get the ll sound.





