The ma'oste defines {ju'o} as follows:
"attitudinal modifier: certainty - uncertainty - impossibility."
If {ju'o} is to express the certainty scale, then this definition is non-compositional. This is similar to the old {.ai nai} definition, which BPFK changed to a much more sensible one (replacing the useless {.ai nai} with a useful one that agrees with the scale the word is on).
In my opinion, the {ju'o} scale should be:
"certainty - [mild certainty] - lack of certainty / uncertainty"
I checked the corpus and {ju'o nai} was rarely used at all, and occasionally used in the sense of current {ju'o cu'i}.
Just like old {.ainai} was completely redundant to {.ai na}, current {ju'o nai} is not much different (if at all) from {ju'o na}.
{ju'o nai} is currently a very rare word, whereas {ju'o cu'i} is extremely common, so its length is painful (this is an actual complaint by language users). With the proposed definition, we'd also get a slightly shorter replacement, so it would be killing two birds with one stone.
Any thoughts?
mi'e la selpa'i mu'o
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.