[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
onomastic etiquette in lojban
- To: John Cowan <cowan@snark.thyrsus.com>, Ken Taylor <taylor@gca.com>
- Subject: onomastic etiquette in lojban
- From: Ivan A Derzhanski <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!iad>
- In-Reply-To: CJ FINE's message of Sat, 30 Nov 91 14:32:33 GMT <27073.9111301432@mail.bradford.ac.uk>
- Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!iad>
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!LOJBAN>
> From: CJ FINE <C.J.Fine@bradford>
>
> Ivan says:
> >
> > if you need a standard, isn't {j} a much better one? Its chances
> > to be mistakenly stripped off the end of a lojbanised name are much
> > lower than those of {s}.
> >
> <...> There is something in me which is repelled by
> all those English names turning into
But that is exactly how it must be. If a lojbanised English name
sounds drastically unEnglish, you'll know for sure that you must do
something (like stripping off the "repellent" last consonant) to it to
get its real form.
> la .edn,bryj and la mantcestyj and la djenifyj
Hm. It seems to me that it is better to use {r} here. Many speakers
pronounce it to some degree anyway. {la mantcestr.}, {la djenifr.}...
> and la xenrij
This is an interesting one. What if we convert it to {la xenrix.}?
What is the German form of the name? Heinrich. There you go.
Ivan