Subject: Re: [lojban] More lexing curiosities - la'i within cmene?

From: Richard Curnow <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 23:27:35 +0100

On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:11:37AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> 
> la lojbab cusku di'e
> 
> >That may be true, but I hope Curnow wants his computer programs to follow
> >the rules.
> 
> Well, if it follows the strict rule, he will be unable to handle
> some otherwise perfectly acceptable words like ala'um. What does
> he have to lose by accepting such words?
> 

I'd certainly like my programs to at least have a mode which calls for
the strictest interpretation of the 'rules'. My initiation of this
thread was an attempt to clarify what the rule actually is for a corner
case that didn't seem to be explicitly described in the materials I had
read.

Having said that, I am also interested in considering
"backward-compatible" extensions that my software can be programmed to
recognize on an optional basis. I'm not sure yet whether there is scope
for any such options regarding cmene (I need to do more thinking based
on everyone's contributions!). However, one "research topic" I'm
looking into is that of words containing both "y" and consonant triples
like "rln". Such words are currently illegal (neither lujvo nor
fu'ivla), yet it's interesting to consider what future uses such a form
may have.

-- 
Richard P. Curnow, Weston-super-Mare, UK
http://www.rrbcurnow.freeuk.com/
email:[email-masked] email:[email-masked]