[lojban] Re: vocative questions

["Adam D. Lopresto" <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Jorge Llambías wrote:

> I agree that pei should turn a vocative into a vocative
> question, rather than ask a question independent of the
> vocative. Many of them would give useful questions:
> nu'epei, ki'epei, fi'ipei, re'ipei, mu'opei, je'epei,
> vi'opei, ke'opei, fe'opei.

Yeah, lots of good stuff there.

> I'm not sure about mi'epei. By logic it seems it should
> be {mi'epei djan}, "Are you John?", but I would tend to
> say {doipei djan}.

Hmmm.  As strange as it sounds, I think {mi'epei djan} should follow the logical
pattern and mean "Are you John?".  {doipei djan} should mean "Are you talking to
John?", which can be pretty useful in its own right.  For instance,  I can see someone
asking {doipei mi}, "You talkin' to me?".  I guess the more general form would be
{doidai ma}.

mu'o mi'e adm.
-- 
Adam Lopresto
http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/

All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by frost.

>>From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken:
The crownless again shall be king.

			--J.R.R. Tolkien