From nicholas@uci.edu Mon Aug 13 11:50:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: nicholas@uci.edu X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 13 Aug 2001 18:50:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 61650 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2001 18:49:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Aug 2001 18:49:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO e4e.oac.uci.edu) (128.200.222.10) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Aug 2001 18:49:32 -0000 Received: from localhost (nicholas@localhost) by e4e.oac.uci.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20529; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:49:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: e4e.oac.uci.edu: nicholas owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:49:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: To: Cc: Nick NICHOLAS Subject: Coelacanth Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Nick NICHOLAS Asks Pierre > The diphthong "oi" is missing. So how would you transliterate > "koilakanthos" > (a kind of fish known from fossils of which the finprlatimeria va'i > gombesa is extant)? The rule being that we get these from Latin (Linnaean) rather than directly from Greek, this means coelacanthus. Because JCB forget to treat oe as a soft vowel, this gives ko'elakanto. So, two things: (1) Do we want to make oe a 'soft vowel'? In English, oe almost always goes to e; e.g. oeconomica > economics. So coelacanth is pronounced seelakanth, not keelakanth. This would then make it co'elakanto. What do French, German, etc. do --- do they treat the c in coelacanth as soft or hard? (2) This would involve adding to the existing standard in the Book, but I still think oi and ai are more convenient for oe and ae, and not hard to recognise. So I'd prefer koilakanto. -- == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == Nick Nicholas, Breathing {le'o ko na rivbi fi'inai palci je tolvri danlu} nicholas@uci.edu -- Miguel Cervantes tr. Jorge LLambias