So, we now have a full table:

ja : vlina
je : kanxe
ji : jijgi
jo : tsida
ju : ribga

And even:
naja : sigda

My question is this: Should we follow the pattern of the first three rows
presented (sorta plus the extra last row presented) and change the endings
of every gismu in order to correspond to the vowel of the corresponding JA
cmavo? In other words, should we prefer tsido over tsida and ribgu
over ribga?

The pros are that it continues the pattern and increases
intuition/mnemonicity.

A neut is that it really does not expand the used gismu space more. By
gimkamsmikezypro, each of the words in each pair actually occupy the same
space (by establishing one CVCC or CCVC, the whole subspace of that initial
string differing in the final attached vowel is divided out and treated as
equivalent). In other words, both options are available already (as are
others) and they all mean the same thing as one another.

A con is that tsido ends with "-o" which is frequently but not
exclusively reserved for cultural gismu. Now, no such gismu can occupy the
"tsid" space due to gimkamsmikezypro, but the intuition is contrary to the
reality of tsida's meaning. Moreover, etymology would be discarded.

Note: I am not saying "should these alternative forms exist?". They already
do. I am merely asking whether they should be /preferred/.

Comment #2: Re: Endings

Curtis W Franks (Mon Feb 6 22:58:25 2017)

krtisfranks wrote: > Note: I am not saying "should these alternative forms exist?". They already > do. I am merely asking whether they should be /preferred/. It should also be noted that preferred forms of gismu determine possible or actualized rafsi (which are not subject to similarity conflicts quotienting out threads in rafsi space) for that word.