Message-Id: <m0qSSKN-000023C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Mon, 25 Jul 1994 08:14:33 -0700
Reply-To:     jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU
Subject:      Re: ga'i[nai], ke'u[nai], va'i[nai]
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Fri, 22 Jul 94 23:12:06 EDT."
              <9407230314.AA10642@julia.math.ucla.edu>
Content-Length: 1392
Lines: 29

Lojbab writes:
> .o'o vs, .o'onai change ... So speak up, people!!

I agree, .o'o should mean anger rather than patience as presently.

> I think "va'i" (clue-word valsi) is less aligned, and could change...

I'm not sure that I agree.  va'i is more naturally translated from the
root word  as "same words" rather than "other words".  My own
preference is to interpret a BAI as an abbreviation for a subordinate
clause containing the root word as predicate.  However, that's not the
current style in Lojban, and people (who my ears have suffered) tend
much more often to explicitly say "in other words", leaving unmarked
the repetitions in the same words.  If you go with Zipf, va'i should
therefore mean "in other words".

> Likewise, with ga'i, and ga'inai, where there has been little real usage.

I disagree.  In the small set of cultures that I have any familiarity
with, the honorific takes the form that another referent, either the
listener or a random sumti in the sentence, is honored versus the
speaker.  It's less common for the speaker to put in a negative
honorific (ga'inai), and then most commonly for self.  So the present
semantic assignment is correct.  However, "hauteur - meekness" seem
confusing as English keywords for this concept; meekness is something
else entirely from either hauteur or honorific; I would suggest
"honorific - abasement".

                -- jimc