Re: [jboske] The ugly head of ni

[John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>]

Invent Yourself scripsit:

> If ni uses ce'u, then it can't express "the degree to which", because
> that's an abstraction of a filled bridi. If ni doesn't need ce'u, then it
> makes sense, but loses its symmetry with ka, and becomes completely
> identical to jei.

Oho!

This gives me an idea.

What if ni is to jei as ka is to du'u?

le ka ce'u kusru la djim. = the property of being cruel to Jim
le ka la djan. kusru ce'u = the property of being a victim of John's cruelty
le du'u la djan. kusru la djim. = the assertion that John is cruel to Jim
le ka ce'u kusru ce'u = cruelty, the relationship between cruel one and victim

le ni ce'u kusru la djim = the amount of cruelty to Jim
le ni la djan. ce'u kusru = the amount of being a victim of John
le jei la djan. ce'u la djim. = the degree to which John is cruel to Jim
le ni ce'u kusru ce'u = the amount of cruelty

I think this is nicely symmetrical, useful, and as consistent with the
past as can be expected.

Comments?

-- 
A poetical purist named Cowan	[that's me: jcowan@reutershealth.com]
Once put the rest of us dowan.	[on xml-dev]
"Your verse would be sweeter	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
If it only had metre	http://www.reutershealth.com
And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan."	[overpacked line!] --Michael Kay