From phma@webjockey.net Sat Dec 14 17:16:11 2002
Return-Path: <phma@ixazon.dynip.com>
X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 15 Dec 2002 01:16:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 73380 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2002 01:16:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
  by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2002 01:16:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (208.150.110.21)
  by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Dec 2002 01:16:09 -0000
Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500)
  id 2385A3C478; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 20:16:08 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] fu'ivla tarmi preti
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 20:16:04 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2]
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214190430.03176d90@pop.east.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20021214190430.03176d90@pop.east.cox.net>
X-Spamtrap: fesmri@ixazon.dynip.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <0212142016040K.03697@neofelis>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@webjockey.net>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92712300

On Saturday 14 December 2002 19:12, Robert LeChevalier wrote:
> Nora is of the opinion (which I would probably agree with if I thought
> about it) that Cowan (and I before him) were not considering fu'ivla when
> writing most of the morphology rules, because then as now, fu'ivla were
> considered unimportant fill-ins that did not need careful definition (and
> indeed such definition was probably impossible). Actually, I think we
> thought of fu'ivla as being closer to names in terms of rules than brivla.
li'o
> ></dl><cx "fu'ivla, consonant clusters in">Note that consonant triples or
> >larger clusters that are not at the be­ginning of a fu'ivla can be quite
> >flexible, as long as all consonant pairs are permissible. There is no need
> >to re­strict fu'ivla clusters to permis­sible initial pairs except at the
> >beginning.

Okay, so fu'ivla can have any length of medial consonant clusters, and 
{mastststststststaka} is valid. But the specification left out a couple of 
rules:

If removing the initial syllaboid from string S results in a fu'ivla, and the 
initial syllaboid is a cmavo, then S is not a fu'ivla (e.g. {packankua}, 
{ickankua}, {raumlongena} are not fu'ivla).

If, however, removing the initial syllaboid from S results in a 
valsrslinku'i, and the initial syllaboid is a cmavo, and S has a consonant 
cluster in the first five letters (not counting y'y and ybu), then S is a 
valid word: either the syllaboid is CV, in which case S is a lujvo, or the 
syllaboid is CVV, CV'V, or all vowels, in which case S is a fu'ivla (e.g. 
{eskrima}, {fauspa'i}).

phma