[lojban] Re: jordis

[Martin Bays <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

* Wednesday, 2004-10-20 at 17:14 -0700 - Jorge Llamb?as <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>:

> 
> --- Martin Bays wrote:
> > """
> > Alternatively, the ``ba'e'' can be moved to a position before the
> > ``la'', which in effect emphasizes the whole construct ``la djordj.'':
> > """
> > This led me to believe that {ba'e} works like UI in this respect.
> The difference is that {ba'e} acts on a word, whereas most UIs don't.
> If you say {djordj iu} you express love for George, not for the word
> {djordj}. If you say {ba'e djordj} on the other hand, you emphasize the
> word {djordj}, not George the person (what would it mean to emphasize a
> person?). So UIs may require more than a single word because they act 
> on what the word points to, and gadri by themselves don't point to 
> anything. I agree that the CLL example would seem to support your 
> view, though.  

That makes alot of sense. I agree that {ba'e} should work as you say (whether
or not it "does").

Does that leave any way to emphasize constructs? A {ba'e} before each word
would be both cumbersome and inaccurate ("*my* *wife*" and "*my wife*" are
different both in pronunciation and meaning). The only option I can see is to
co-opt {fu'e} - am I missing something less kludgey?