Message-Id: <m0rDXzP-00007FC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Fri, 2 Dec 1994 01:54:34 +0000
Reply-To:     ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: cmavo hit-list
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Wed, 30 Nov 94 21:51:29 EST.)
Content-Length: 2514
Lines: 61

>         jei li'i si'o mu'e pu'u za'i zu'o (abstractions)
>
> {jei} I don't know what it could be used for, since all the examples
> are as a substitute for {du'u xukau}, but this is not the same as the
> truth value of a bridi.

I've wondered about that. "Jei" is nicer, but "xukau" is analogous
to "mokau".

> {li'i} and {si'o} I'm still not sure how to use. And has been using si'o
> lately for the opacity examples, but I would use du'u for all of those,
> and I don't see what si'o adds to it.

"Siho" is something existing inside a mind - a concept. "Duhu" is
(I think) a proposition. "Lihi" I don't know how to define, or why
it was felt to be necessary, but the English gloss gives one an
intuitive indication of what it means. I used it in a poem I haven't
posted: "le lihi tohermanku manci" - 'the experience of undark wonder".

> The four subdivisions of {nu} I think I understand, but I never feel
> the need to use them instead of the simple {nu}. Maybe I will come to
> need them when I become more fluent, but for the moment I don't.

They are standard in linguistics (acquired from philosophers) but only
standard as descriptive labels. I certainly don't think they're basic
situation types, & grammaticalizing them strikes me as a mistake,
though I accept that it is now an irrevocable one.

>         ze'o zo'a zo'i  (location tenses)
>
> They seem to be very similar to to'o, te'e, fa'a. The tense paper
> says something about ones relating to the speaker and the others not,
> but why then isn't this a problem with other FAhAs, which could also
> relate to the speaker or to some other point?

I think that what may be special about these is that they define
a direction with respect to the boundary of X of something that is
within X. If I'm right, I think this is useful.

>         dau fei gai jau rei vai (hex digits)
>
> What a waste of top quality cmavo...

Tragic. Also consider "su" - erase-to-start-of-discourse. Does the
frequency with which we'll wish to do that justify using up a lovely
CV cmavo? NO WAY! There are other cases where cmavo space has been
squandered with equal profligacy.

Also, the foha & koha series could have been shrunk and expanded at
the same time by using a singlecmavo plus a number. E.g. supa sure
sici (where SU is put to a better use as this cmavo).

>         vu'i sei se'o fu'e fu'o
>
> These are on probation until I work out what they mean :)

"Se'o" is a useful epistemic modal. How do you know God exists?
"Se'o" - by inner experience.

---
And