Subject: [lojban] Re: required commas (was Re: Stress of cmene)

From: Lionel Vidal <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 09:54:14 +0200

Robert LeChevalier wrote:
> For once supplication provides a documented resolution. See the two 
> sections in the following marked with 5 asterisks.

Thank you for having posted that: it is interresting to see the origin 
of some of the choices made in CLL.

>> Close-commas may also occur between consonants in cmene and in le'avla 
>> (borrowed brivla) to indicate variant syllabication of consonant 
>> clusters. 

This one was kept in CLL and I don't like it: allowing variant 
syllabication in clusters, with all the buffered vowels it may imply, is 
the first step towards introducing potential discrepancies in the 
audiovisual-isomorphism, which I think is one of the strong point of 
lojban morphology. And what is the gain anyway: in case of clusters 
don't you think the resulting sounds should be the same, whatever the 
syllabication?

> So clearly the intent in the language design is that pronunciation of a 
> comma as an apostrophe (consonantal buffer) is ONLY permitted (and then 
> merely as an option for speakers of languages that need it) in 
> Lojbanized names (and usage has been to use an apostrophe in that 
> situation). The baseline should therefore either eliminate the 
> pronunciation as an apostrophe (if audiovisual isomorphism in names is 
> deemed critical), or restrict that option only to names as a 
> dispreferred option.

I would simplfy and not create an exception for cmene. It may even be 
helpful in some cases to recognise names. For instance the closest form 
of my own name in french would be {li,oNEL} (with a almost unmarked 
glide), and while I feel addressed when hearing {lioNEL}, {li,ioNEL}, 
and even {LAIionel} :-), something like {li'oNEL} or worse {li'Onel} 
sounds like somebody else to me. Probably an indirect effect of my 
native language morphology :-)

Anyway, to enforce audiovisual isomorphism, I would propose to allow 
commas only as the mean to override left-wise grouping in vowels strings 
and to define its preferred pronouncation as being different from any 
other already used lojban phonem (any form of glide will do).
But maybe that sounds too restrictive ?

Best wishes,
Lionel

---

From: Lionel Vidal <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 09:54:14 +0200

Best wishes,
Lionel