Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of betsemes@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22b as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::22b;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6040e08c-2737-4a67-8e60-1ab3e3336757@googlegroups.com>
References: <20130504201243.GE20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
	<51856E57.2010808@gmx.de>
	<20130504202515.GG20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
	<CAHxnAm+NUxq=seQpKCgLT9Wmoouj4ypJMZeXBxNFDz3m3s8v_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<55921D19-DB32-4D41-B6E9-1552B5BC9AB3@yahoo.com>
	<CAHxnAmKZTxe4Ps0H0WhVyY2k3WoiFi3=3zXsgRoW3EAg3jpJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A8DBDCA-994A-4A20-9BAD-A3A4F3561B49@yahoo.com>
	<CAHxnAmLZ0WLPyTWqfLj=dsh+kBDcWdkh+qmrVnEJNs9mteoCZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5F42DC95-D2C4-4B0D-B018-A4BC82AAFB06@yahoo.com>
	<CAHiXx=MzU2uukh7VfJsfOREStCkY3pBrDVKzCFghmRLumZA3Xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxnAmK7VEvD+7n1YB1hd4S0EqK0GBTOWRdG6fppAvfoPsFP4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALm==BUm693hFg+hstkOmEDM16x_w=z56oJ8oJgp-06Bf1DCtQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOQ8VDWLdPm7D_UqVK0FVkOaGrXCeUxuyESyt1QVfhUEkeL=-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<6f8da748-aa03-4c4c-bbb2-c7662790621c@googlegroups.com>
	<5188CE66.7050209@gmx.de>
	<50148f9d-a57a-4c32-a469-81e20a08d583@googlegroups.com>
	<518903AC.6070807@gmx.de>
	<b52b06a4-fe53-41f3-ada9-220d926de01c@googlegroups.com>
	<CAHxnAmJjZkt-RH9s+YFCYk5MkH8azOtJiM-amnPDYLXR4kP1Kg@mail.gmail.com>
	<122cf11e-daf0-4c8f-9186-c370a8faee77@googlegroups.com>
	<CAHxnAmJ1gUXMmuE6=GnG5mU=GmSx8hHeDFtG6cdwKpgN+xLiTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<53d4061c-1052-473c-9f94-f8a6e54474fb@googlegroups.com>
	<CAHxnAm+nHWAa4T0rBehP2wPbmCikbpxmnzBFojJW5VYMK_fh4Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<6040e08c-2737-4a67-8e60-1ab3e3336757@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 07:04:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxnAmJbextGSbD3cCWiCcCKup4LMwMYJYYZqXz=EcLrLu0RzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Robin retry: commands.
From: Betsemes <betsemes@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

Just for the record and just in case; I'm being inquisitive only. I
just am asking questions. I consider the topic of commands, a topic of
importance; so I don't want it to just die away without a proper
conclusion as it seemed to be happening. I want a solution. I'm not
being confrontational.

Also, I paused replying to this discussion for a few days to learn the
lojban words the fluents were introducing, something I'm still doing,
because I'm not fluent yet. That's why I insisted on replying in my
non-native English.

That said, back to topic.

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 12:45 AM, la arxokuna
<gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
> {rei}  may indeed lead to confusion with {re} as they are both numbers. So
> speaking in terms of practicism {xei} is preferable.
> But then {rei} is useless. Let's look at the corpus:
> http://www.lojban.org/corpus/search/rei
> I could count only 5 (!) real usages of {rei}. So why bother? In the corpus
> we have many more occurrencies of other words that have never been properly
> defined and/or entered into jvs.

I have already seen the poor usage of {rei}.

> As for commands I'm sure it's an utterly important thing.
> So using rei for command imperatives and {reinai} for prohibitives ...

What are prohibitives? At face value it sounds like: "reinai ko broda"
(I forbid you to do/be broda). Is this what it means. As I guess it
is, it's just a command for not doing something, and thus pointless.
Could you enlighten me?

> would be
> nice (of course {xoi} can also be used but {rei} reminds of {.ei} so ...)
> Also the sound [r] has subliminal impression of resoluteness in many
> languages.
> Three-syllable cmavo cluster for prohibitives would be too verbose.
>
> the CLL was written 16 years ago. Such words as {xo'e}, {xo'o}, {xa'o} are
> used many more times than some even one-syllable cmavo.
> So although officially {xo'e} is experimental it's de facto one of the key
> concepts of the language. The same for the other two xV'V.

If you care for my opinion on experimentals, I'd say the concept of
them for a human language is impractical. It may sound good for
another matter, but I see human languages as living things. Once a
language is absorbed into an individual, it becomes alive. So a word
already assimilated and used is hard to unlearn as surely as a wounded
organism will attempt to heal.

> For me {.e'i}=to have to
> {.ei} = should/ought to

So then, how a cmavo for commands would be defined?

rei attitudinal: command - ????

mu'o mi'e betsemes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.