Re: [Loglanists] Re: an illegal word in dictionary, suggested repair

[Randall Holmes]

Hoi Keugru, i hoi logli

Here is an actual Proposal (formed after some conversation with John),

  I found the word <riyhasgru> in the dictionary, which my parser views as an error, but I am told by James that legacy software does assume CVy djifoa correlated with CV cmapua. I do not recall that CVy djifoa are documented anywhere, and I do not like them. I propose that the CVh djifoa be assigned to correlate with those CV cmapua which do not already have djifoa. None of these are in use (they are not ideal as they must be y hyphenated) -- their pronunciation can be more definite than their spelling suggests because the hard pronunciation of h as ch in loch can be used. This requires no parser changes and would change <riyhasgru> to <rihyhasgru> in the dictionary. There might be other words of this kind which would have similar systematic modifications.

 This is not something I regard as highest priority.  The alternative would be to implement CVy djifoa, to which I have phonetic objections (too easily confused with unstressed CVV djifoa); John convinced me that my alternative scheme with CVry and

CVny djifoa was a bad idea.

You will find the text of this proposal in the agenda document next time I update it; by the way, I have cleaned up the proposal section so it should be much easier to read...

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Randall Holmes <m.randal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Here is a principled objection to CVy djifoa which I think you should like:  we should avoid any situation where the distinction between a y and anything else is phonemic.  We already have this in one bad case (CVVr vs CVVy for some djifoa) which I am quite willing to banish, by the way, but which is not too bad as r is a (semi)consonant and y is a vowel...  But a CVy would

be confusable with a CVV (particularly a CVa for English speakers)

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Randall Holmes <m.randal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Im convinced :-)  I'm going to write a wee proposal.

On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:48 PM, John Cowan <co...@mercury.ccil.org> wrote:

Randall Holmes scripsit:

> Is there a reason in your mind to actively prefer CVhy to CVy?  I am
> thinking that the former is less likely to be confused with something
> else (as rea- might be with rey- for example)

That's true.  Furthermore, Vy is an extension to the phonology that in my
view we should not have.

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        co...@ccil.org

You're a brave man! Go and break through the lines, and remember while
you're out there risking life and limb through shot and shell,
we'll be in here thinking what a sucker you are!    --Rufus T. Firefly

--
Sincerely, Randall Holmes

Any opinions expressed above are not the
official opinions of any person or institution.

--
Sincerely, Randall Holmes

Any opinions expressed above are not the
official opinions of any person or institution.

--
Sincerely, Randall Holmes

Any opinions expressed above are not the
official opinions of any person or institution.