Re: [lojban] Use of gismu components in lujvo

[Betsemes]

Here: http://jwodder.freeshell.org/lojban/jvozba.cgi?tanru=rokci+cevni&vlalei=pluja
you get:
lujvo Score
rokcei 5867
rokcev 5898
ro'ircei 7456
ro'ircev 7487
rokcevni 7937
rokcycei 7997
rokcycev 8028
ro'ircevni 9526
rokcycevni 10067

mu'o mi'e betsemes

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Adam Chevalier
<chevali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've noticed that some of the possible combinations of gismu components when
> forming a lujvo confuse vlasisku.
> Does this mean these combinations are invalid? Or does vlasisku simply have
> a hard time seeing some of the combos?
>
> e.g.
>
> rokci - rok, ro'i
> cevni - cev, cei
>
> vlasisku can see the components in cevro'i and rokcei, but no other
> combinations.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "lojban" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/4iWt0PNsWDoJ.
> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

[Betsemes]

Well, obviously I assume that you know that those valsi that end on a
consonant are cmevla, do you?

[Pierre Abbat]

On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 06:26:48 Adam Chevalier wrote:
> I've noticed that some of the possible combinations of gismu components
> when forming a lujvo confuse vlasisku.
> Does this mean these combinations are invalid? Or does vlasisku simply have
> a hard time seeing some of the combos?
>
> e.g.
>
> rokci - rok, ro'i
> cevni - cev, cei
>
> vlasisku can see the components in cevro'i and rokcei, but no other
> combinations.

A lujvo beginning "ro'i" or "cei" has to have an interfix "r" or "n" right
after that, else the "ro'i" or "cei" falls off: ro'inro'i, ceircei. "cevcei" is
invalid because of the cluster; it needs to be "cevycei". "rokro'i" is valid.

Pierre
--
gau do li'i co'e kei do

[Adam Chevalier]

@Efrain: I suppose if I'd known that I wouldn't need to ask the question, would I?

@Pierre: Thank you, that was helpful. I don't quite understand, but I'm sure understanding will dawn on me as my lojban skills strengthen.

What do the scores for each of the lujvo represent?

[Ian Johnson]

Essentially the scores are "how canonical" the word is, disregarding the possibility that it's actually not a lujvo (which several of those like rokcev are not). Generally the desirable form of the lujvo is the lowest scoring one, some occasional exceptions with sound. (For example {ci'omle} is typically preferred over {citmle}).

mu'o mi'e la latro'a

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/v8qBk8jVDFoJ.

[Betsemes]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Adam Chevalier
<chevali...@gmail.com> wrote:

> @Pierre: Thank you, that was helpful. I don't quite understand, but I'm sure
> understanding will dawn on me as my lojban skills strengthen.
>
> What do the scores for each of the lujvo represent?
>
>

Here: http://dag.github.com/cll/4/3/ it says:
> All brivla have the following properties:
> 1.always end in a vowel;
> 2.always contain a consonant pair in the first five letters, where “y” and apostrophe are not counted as letters for this purpose. (See Section 6.)
> 3.always are stressed on the next-to-the-last (penultimate) syllable; this implies that they have two or more syllables.

Read the second point and let's take ro'i and cei. By just putting
them together we get "ro'icei". The first five letters are "roice"
(the apostrophe doesn't count) which do not have any pair of
consonants. So the rule that Pierre mentions comes in. You place "r"
between ro'i and cei and get ro'ircei. Now "roirc" complies with the
rules of making brivla because of the "rc" consonant pair.

[Adam Chevalier]

Thanks for all your help, and I'd like to apologize for being rude earlier. There was no call for it.

[Betsemes]

On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Adam Chevalier
<chevali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for all your help, and I'd like to apologize for being rude earlier.
> There was no call for it.

a'u I didn't interpret your comment as being rude.