Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qSSm4-000023C; Mon, 25 Jul 94 19:21 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9012; Mon, 25 Jul 94 19:19:45 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9009; Mon, 25 Jul 1994 19:19:44 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6100; Mon, 25 Jul 1994 18:18:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 1994 08:38:47 -0700 Reply-To: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU Subject: Re: ciska bai tu'a zo bai X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 22 Jul 94 23:33:08 EDT." <9407230335.AA10695@julia.math.ucla.edu> Content-Length: 756 Lines: 16 Lojbab says: > That status quo is and HAS ALWAYS BEEN that which I stated in my message, tha > ga'inai would mean self-abnegation or obsequiousness in all contexts, but wou > emphasize the contrast by marking that which is relatively more important. I would like to believe that ga'i means that the speaker feels that the marked referent is of higher rank than the speaker (honorific), and ga'inai means that the speaker feels superior (abasement of the referent or elevation of the speaker). So, while in my recent posting I said that the scale of ga'i should not be reversed, that judgement was in fact reversed. Sorry for the flip-flop. Dare I say it? I don't see ci'a - cnita (below) assigned in the 6/13/94 cmavo list... -- jimc