Re: scales, tolcipni

[jorge@phyast.pitt.edu]

> >I see {milxe} more as {normutce}.  {tolmutce} is very little.
>
> So we are starting with different ideas of milxe.  Given a scalar function,
> my intent for these was:
>
>
> <- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >
> traji na    mutce na      milxe na | milxe           mutce             traji
> to'e                              no'e                                  je'a
> |              na'e                |

Why not enrich the scale:

traji (na)      extremely not something
mutce (na)      very much not something
milxe (na)      somewhat not something
tolmutce (na)   very little not something
nutli           neutral
tolmutce        very little
milxe           somewhat
mutce           very much
traji           extremely


> Given that each of these words have particular places on the scale,
> treating each term as its own scale is at best ambiguous.

I don't see the problem. What else could {tolmutce} be but "very
little of"?

>  Is to'e milxe
> some kind of mutce? Or some kind of milxe na

I don't know. I never included it because unlike {mutce}, {milxe}
doesn't seem to present a natural scale by itself.

{milxe} is to me the neutral in the {mutce} scale, and the opposite
of the neutral is still the neutral.

Jorge