lujvo....

["Trevor C. Hill" <trevor@AMON-RA.RES.CMU.EDU>]

I am currently trying to learn lojban, and haven't gotten _that_ far as of
yet, but my friend (who is also learning it) and I had an interesting talk
about lujvo today....

It seems to me that the problem of ambiguity where an incorrectly
constructed lujvo might be interpreted as a tanru, might be greatly
simplified by some easy changes...  even though it seems that correctly
constructed lujvo don't have any problems.....

If it were decided that rafsi would automatically bind to the rafsi or
gismu coming immediately after, and that lujvo must end in a gismu rather
than a rafsi, there would be no ambiguity between tanru and long lujvo,
and there would further be no need to use 'r' or 'n' to stick rafsi
together.  The 'y' would still be used to separate two rafsi when the
first ended with the same consonant as in the beginning of the second...

Of course, not having used lujvo extensively yet, I really don't have a
right to suggest any changes........  because as far as I know the above
change might introduce other ambiguities I haven't thought of yet...... :)

just a thought,

Trevor C. Hill
th2x+@andrew.cmu.edu