WikiDiscuss

---

> I don't think type-3 fu'ivla should have any different clusters than type-4.
> That would mean that {turnstile} is valid but {turlstile} is not.

I tend to agree.

With the current PEG, both are valid anyway because it doesn't
distinguish between r/n/l, so it allows a bit more than type-3:
it also allows similar forms with pseudo-hyphen.

But it won't allow truturnstile for example, because the crunchy
bit is not in type-3 position.

> > Issue2: Vowel clusters.
> >
> > Currently, any number of non-y vowels are allowed in cmavo, fu'ivla and
> > cmene. Syllable breaks after ai, au, ei, oi, ia, ie, ii, io, iu, ua, ue,
> > ui, uo, uu or a single vowel. Special cmavo: Cy, y'y, y = yy = yyy = yyyy =
> > ... In cmene, y is allowed freely.
>
> valfendi allows no more than two vowels without an apostrophe. I'm not sure
> why that is, but no experimental cmavo in the Book with more than two vowels
> has no apostrophe.

But doesn't it allow more than that in cmene? What about in fu'ivla?

I'm not convinced one way or the other about vowels yet. It doesn't
seem right to allow fu'ivla like {priiiiiiiiiika} (currently allowed,
and syllabified as prii,ii,ii,ii,ii,ka), but I'm not sure what the right
balance between restrictiveness and permissiveness is for vowels. In any
case, I would like the same rule to apply to all cmene, fu'ivla and cmavo.

> > Issue3: Rafsi
> >
> > All fu'ivla can be used as final rafsi, and all have a non-final rafsi by
> > adding 'y.
>
> Any rafsi formation that adds an extra syllable is unnecessary. We have
> {zei}.

{'y} allows shorter lujvo in some cases: {.iglu'ypre} vs {.iglu zei prenu}
for example.

Besides, {.iglu zei prenu} is semantically one word but morphologically
three words. zei-lujvo are unsatisfying for that reason.

> > Any fu'ivla that ends in a single vowel gets a short rafsi by dropping the
> > final vowel and replacing with y if that doesn't create a conflict with
> > normal lujvo.
>
> The last criterion needs to be spelled out. The PEG has a criterion, and
> valfendi has a criterion, and we need to prove that they define the same set.

I will try to spell the rules out in more detail in another post.

> > cmene can have initial rafsi by adding -iy-
>
> Can't do that. Cmene don't need to have a consonant cluster, and they can
> begin with non-initial consonant clusters, so a fu'ivla beginning with a
> cmene like that would be unlexable.

What do you mean by unlexable here? It causes no ambiguity.

The issue of y and cmene is a bit more complex than what I wrote there
though. My idea is that "y" (except in the special cmavo Cy, y'y and y)
will _always_ be a hyphen. Even a cmene containing y could be understood
as a hyphened name. (That doesn't really change anything because cmene
don't really carry meaning explicitly, so it makes little difference
if you picture the cmene {maiky'elsem} as a simple name or as a
hyphened-name with components {maik} and {.elsem}.)

Another thing is that y would not be distinctive at the beginning
of a name, so every name could add or drop an initial y without
changing the name: .djan. = .ydjan. This way, a glottal stop at
the beginning of a name becomes less troublesome, and this y can
also be thought of as the hesitation y, which this way can now
come before any word without need to be followed by a pause.

> > non-y cmavo can have non-final rafsi by adding 'y
>
> We have {zei}.

Yes, but again, that breaks down the connection between semantic
and morphological words, and sometimes 'y does save syllables too.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com