Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA08047 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 5 Dec 1994 20:33:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199412060133.AA08047@nfs2.digex.net> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0533; Mon, 05 Dec 94 20:23:27 EST Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0832; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 18:27:18 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 18:28:40 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: some outstanding issues X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 5 20:33:58 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu la djan cusku di'e > > 2- A rafsi for {jai}. Since all SE have rafsi, and {jai} is very much > > like a SE, I think it could use one too. jaz seems to be available. > > I suspect this is not useful for "jai" followed by BAI or tense, as no BAI > has a rafsi (use the gismu) and only a few tenses. For "jai" standing alone, > there may be a case. Yes, I was mainly thinking of its standalone uses, things like: jazbai (jai bapli) x1(agent) forces x2 to happen by force x3 jazjde (jai kajde) x1(agent) warns x2 of x3 by action x4 jazyxai (jai xrani) x1(agent) injures x2 ... by action x5 jazyzdi (jai zdile) x1(agent) amuses x2 ... by action x4 and many other selbri that have causative events in x1 but usually make sense with an agent there. {-gau} is not very good for this because it leaves the causative event in x2, and often that's not the best order. Of course, it is not always necessary to make a lujvo, it is enough to use jai by itself, but the same is true of the SE cmavo. Jorge