Re: Mark's proposed "ja'ai" already exists

[John Cowan <cowan@xxxxx.xxxx.xxxx]

Blunderingly I wrote:

> >There is already a positive analogue to "nai", and that is "jo'a".
> >It can be attached to attitudes to make them explicitly positive,
> >or used as a general metalinguistic affirmer: this is so, despite
> >appearances otherwise.
> >
> >Grammatically "jo'a" belongs to UI rather than NAI, but that simply
> >means it cannot be used in place of the non-attitudinal uses of "nai",
> >such as with connectives, tenses, etc. (In practice if you want
> >to say ".ejo'a" it is grammatical 99% of the time.)

Mark Shoulson hrmphed:

> Hrmph. I'm not sure I'm satisfied. If ja'o means the same as my proposed
> ja'ai, then na'i must be the same as nai.

Oops. jo'a is the counterpart of na'i indeed. There is no counterpart
of nai; jo'a = na'inai.

-- 
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin