From richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com Sun Feb 11 14:31:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 11 Feb 2001 22:31:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 69460 invoked from network); 11 Feb 2001 22:31:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Feb 2001 22:31:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chalfont.mail.uk.easynet.net) (195.40.1.44) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Feb 2001 22:31:23 -0000 Received: from rrbcurnow.freeuk.com (tnt-6-78.easynet.co.uk [195.40.201.78]) by chalfont.mail.uk.easynet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3525AF83D2 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:31:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from richard by rrbcurnow.freeuk.com with local (Exim 2.02 #2) id 14S503-000039-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:29:43 +0000 Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:29:43 +0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Consonant cluster clarification Message-ID: <20010211222943.B183@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com> Reply-To: Richard Curnow Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <0101311805580J.07119@neofelis> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i-nntp In-Reply-To: <0101311805580J.07119@neofelis>; from phma@oltronics.net on Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 05:59:09PM -0500 Sender: Richard Curnow X-eGroups-From: Richard Curnow From: Richard Curnow On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 05:59:09PM -0500, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > It appears to me that all stage 3 fu'ivla formed from a CVCCV gismu violate > this rule, for instance "jinmrtitani" has the four-consonant cluster "nmrt" in > it. So is the rule actually that consonant clusters can have up to three > consonants in a row between syllabic consonants? > To get consistency with the rules for stage 3 fu'ivla, it certainly seems true that a syllabic consonant (l, m, n or r) is required so that no cluster of >3 other letters remains. I was wondering if anyone has a view on what happens in an initial cluster of a (stage 4) fu'ivla. The rule is that all pairs in the cluster must be valid initial pairs. Does a syllabic consonant within the cluster (if any) cause the end of what is considered the initial cluster, or not? i.e., do the consonants after a syllabic consonant only have to be valid pairs, i.e. not necessarily valid _initial_ pairs? My interpretation of the book is that this is *not* the case, i.e. all pairs within the initial cluster must be valid initial pairs. Under this interpretation, the longest initial cluster would be 5 consonants in length, of the form CCCml or CCCmr (where the CC pairs are valid initial pairs, as is the final C+m.), to be interpreted as CCC,mr etc. This exploits the fact that m is the only syllabic consonant that can begin a valid initial pair. Thoughts anybody? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard P. Curnow rpc@myself.com Weston-super-Mare United Kingdom http://go.to/richard.curnow/