Re: loglan rapprochement orthography

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>No, in IPA it could reasonably be represented with [o] as well as [u].
>
>Anyway, it seems then that these are alternative phonologies as well as
>alternative orthographies. One has /au/ and no /ao/, and the other has
>/ao/ and no /au/.

No because the actually phonoilogy is identical - it is the orthographic
representation of the diphthong that differs, and not the diphthong itself.
JCB seems to pride himself on inventing his own jargon terminology and
conventions rather than finding out what linguistics has done in the same
place.  It makes his stuff ever harder to read once you get used to the
lingusitic definitions of terms.

lojbab