Message-Id: <199407251520.AA03088@nfs1.digex.net> Reply-To: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU Date: Mon Jul 25 11:20:56 1994 Sender: Lojban list From: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU Subject: Re: ga'i[nai], ke'u[nai], va'i[nai] X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 22 Jul 94 23:12:06 EDT." <9407230314.AA10642@julia.math.ucla.edu> Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jul 25 11:20:56 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU 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