Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: (C)V'{i|u}V

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 17:38:43 -0400 (EDT)

Richard Curnow scripsit:

> Others (aa,ae,ao,ea,ee,eo,eu,oa,oe,oo,ou) _could_ be automatically
> treated as though they have a comma (==apostrophe). But is this
> entertained by the baseline?

IMHO no. A word like baa or jbofie is a morphological monstrosity,
and should be reported as an error, just as brodybri'e should be
(it cannot be a cmene, cmavo, gismu, lujvo, or fu'ivla).

The relevant principles are:

1. Commas never affect word identity or resolution.

2. The 11 illegal pairs can only appear in cmene or fu'ivla, in which
case they may be pronounced like the corresponding V'Vs
(so fa'an and fa,an are not distinct names, and bro,aboda and
bro'aboda are not distinct brivla).

The whole point of forbidding cmavo like fa,i is that
it could be understood as fai or fa'i; and likewise for fa,a, fa, and fa'a.

-- 
John Cowan [email-masked]
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
--Douglas Hofstadter