From mark@kli.org Sun Aug 22 18:21:52 1999 X-Digest-Num: 218 Message-ID: <44114.218.1180.959273825@eGroups.com> Date: 23 Aug 1999 01:21:52 -0000 From: mark@kli.org Subject: Re: Lojban analogies and kennings; also "pe'a/po'a" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 1180 >Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 17:34:52 -0700 >From: Ron Hale-Evans > >Thanks for your response, Jorge! > >>From: "Jorge Llambias" >> >>>From: Ron Hale-Evans >>> >>> L1. menske : menli :: ji'eske : xadni >>> >>> L2. .i ke menske tai menli ke'e tai ke ji'eske tai xadni ke'e >>> >>> L3. .i menske du menli ji'eske > > > >>L2 is ungrammatical. The cmavo of selmaho BAI, like {tai}, >>can be used to tag a sumti or a selbri, much like tenses. >>They don't work as connectives by themselves. You might >>say something like: >> >> zo menske peki'i zo menli zo ji'eske peki'i zo xadni panra >> {menske} in relationship to {menli} is parallel to >> {ji'eske} in relationship to {xadni}. > >Thanks. I don't want to talk about the words, though; I want to talk >about abstract things. How about this? > > lo menske peki'i lo menli cu panra lo ji'eske peki'i lo xadni > >What is "peki'i", BTW? Some kind of compound cmavo? I couldn't find >"peki'i", "pek", "pe" or "ki'i" in any wordlist or the Red Book. Maybe neki'i would be better, actually. "peki'i" is a compound cmavo: pe ki'i. ki'i is a BAI word, "as a relation of...", modeled after ckini. pe is restrictive association. But we're not talking about psychology which is associate with minds as opposed to other kinds of psychology; non-restrictive (ne) would make more sense, right? ~mark