nice sound for lojban "r"
buro...@yahoo.co.uk
r, where allowed lojban this version, we do not want multiple dialects
as before we want to be one, this is my opinion.
Pierre Abbat
What do you mean by "bite the letter r"? Lojban has several allophones of /r/;
I use at least three of them, depending on the phonetic context.
Pierre
--
Don't buy a French car in Holland. It may be a citroen.
MorphemeAddict
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
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.
Pierre Abbat
> Having more than one sound for 'r' wouldn't create multiple dialects. We
> already have several allophones for 'r'.
The most it would create is multiple accents. If there were two groups of
Lojbanists and one used "fi'u" as the rafsi of "frinu" while the other used
it as the rafsi for "cfipu", or one used "malpigi" to mean a fruit while the
other knew it only as a word for an insect's kidney, or one always used "cu"
between "mi" and the selbri and the other didn't, then you'd have dialects.
Pierre
--
li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du
li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci
buro...@yahoo.co.uk
Seems that the idea of dispensing with the other sounds of the
letter r have not Like to many, I also do not want do without for
that, but more importantly I have to use the French sound for this
character if there is a grammer rule for the use of each "r" sound be
thankful.
I mean the word "bite" to say the letter "r" as the r French sound
co'o
tsani nicte
buro...@yahoo.co.uk
know the difference between them, but mentioned french r to the
strangers, for example, "In fact there is a difference and there is
splendor in this letter -french r-"
On 5 يناير, 03:49, tsani nicte <nicty...@gmail.com> wrote:
> coi
>
> I think that the French r sound would most likely sound a lot like the
> current Lojban x sound, at least that's how I pronounce the French r (I am
> from Quebec). Also, if you feel more comfortable speaking French rather
> than English, feel free to do so. There are (albeit not many) francophone
> Lojbanists who could answer any question.
>
> mu'o mi'e la tsani
>
>
> - عرض النص المقتبس -
buro...@yahoo.co.uk
see it in ful screen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEnxRVh7Jdg&noredirect=1
On 5 يناير, 13:25, "buroq_...@yahoo.co.uk" <buroq_...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> > - عرض النص المقتبس -- إخفاء النص المقتبس -
vitci'i
Thank you for your recent contributions to the lojban mailing list!
Unfortunately, it is often difficult nowadays to distinguish humans from
bots. Please complete the following short quiz to prove that you are not
a spammer.
1. Complete the sentence: Lojban is...
a. a type of sandwich
b. a language
c. a tax form
d. the act of sneezing
Thank you for your time.
Matthew Walton
.u'isai lo mlapau be mi ku pu porpi pe'a
buro...@yahoo.co.uk
lojban is the logical human language.
On 5 يناير, 23:32, Matthew Walton <matthew.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sebastian Fröjd
I'm not a linguist but I just wonder if it's really the way Pierre describes it: that the concept dialect is defined by the usage of different words for the same thing, not by the phonetic differences? For example, swedish may sound quite different depending on where in Sweden you are, due to the different swedish "dialects". Incidentally there are also some specific words for different swedish "dialects", which I've always regarded as a secondary characteristic of dialects. I also wonder what the geographical ja cultural level are in the definition of a dialect. Has any lujvo yet been defined for the concept of dialect, sociolect and accent, respectively? Since gismu generally has a very vague/broad semantic range, I think you could use zo "bangu" even when speaking of different dialects/accents, right? So if you would like to explicit speak of languages (definition?), not dialects nor something else, you'll need a lujvo specifically for that also, right?
However, I think it's a good thing that lojban is a bit flexible with the pronounciation of phonemes. I think it makes sense to speak lojban with different accents and melody. It also makes lojban easier to learn for people of different cultural backgrounds. For example I like to pronounce "ng" in lojban nasal as in "sing", as long as you can hear the g in the end, and similar small variations depending on the phonetic context.
And even if lojban has more restrictions than natlang, I think lojban will develop quite different in different parts of the world as the community grows. For example In which combinations of grammatical constructs, tanru and attitudinals different social groups prefer.
The most important thing would still be to be able understand each other, right?
mu'omi'e jongausib
Jonathan Jones
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
And Rosta
Phonologically different pronunciation among native speakers is dialect difference.
Pierre Abbat
> Phonologically different pronunciation among native speakers is dialect
> difference.
>
> On Jan 9, 2012 11:17 AM, "Jonathan Jones" <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Differing pronunciation is "accent", not dialect.
To clarify the difference with some examples:
In Castile, the letters "z" and "s" are pronounced differently. In Andaluz and
most or all of Hispanic America, they are pronounced the same. This is an
accent difference; it affects all words with "z", "ce", or "ci" in them. (Use
of "vosotros"/"vos"/"ustedes" and words used in one place but not others are
dialect differences.)
In American English and in British English, the phoneme /u/ is distinguished
from the diphthong /au/. In both dialects, "rout" and "router" (woodworking
tool) are pronounced with /au/. In America, "route" and "router" (networking
tool) are pronounced with /au/, whereas they are pronounced with /u/ in
England (from what I know; I've never been there). This is a phonologically
different pronunciation of a same word, thus a dialect difference. I, though
American, follow the British pronunciation of this word, being a son of a
French immigrant; this is an idiolect difference.
Pierre
--
li fi'u vu'u fi'u fi'u du li pa
la .lindar.
Accents typically differ in quality of voice, pronunciation of vowels and consonants, stress, and prosody. Although grammar, semantics, vocabulary, and other language characteristics often vary concurrently with accent, the word 'accent' refers specifically to the differences in pronunciation, whereas the word 'dialect' encompasses the broader set of linguistic differences. Often 'accent' is a subset of 'dialect'.[1]"
- Wikipedia article on 'accent (linguistics'.
Sid
uvular fricative) for the French ‹r›, which would indeed be Lojban {x}
-- but some other dialects/accents use [ʁ] (the voiced uvular
fricative), which is indeed {r}. The latter is probably what buroq has
in mind.
Also, as a side note regarding the "beauty" of the French r -- I was
told a story that once French tried to replace the French r with /z/,
because they felt the sound was too ugly. This obviously didn't pan
out, but it did affect a handful of words -- that's why the French use
"chaise", instead of the original "chaire" (which was borrowed into
English as "chair"). The more you know.
mi'e cntr
Pierre Abbat
> re: tsani -- I'm told that some French dialects/accents use [χ] (the
> voiceless uvular fricative) for the French ‹r›, which would indeed be
> Lojban {x} -- but some other dialects/accents use [ʁ] (the voiced uvular
> fricative), which is indeed {r}. The latter is probably what buroq has
> in mind.
There's a kind of clay called rhassoul, also spelled ghassoul. The first letter
in Arabic is ghayn, which is a rhotic to the French but not to some other
peoples, hence the two spellings.
> Also, as a side note regarding the "beauty" of the French r -- I was
> told a story that once French tried to replace the French r with /z/,
> because they felt the sound was too ugly. This obviously didn't pan
> out, but it did affect a handful of words -- that's why the French use
> "chaise", instead of the original "chaire" (which was borrowed into
> English as "chair"). The more you know.
I think the reason "chaise" stuck is that "chaire" is a homophone of "chair",
which means "flesh".
Pierre
--
La sal en el mar es más que en la sangre.
Le sel dans la mer est plus que dans le sang.