srana le'i sucta cmavo

["michael helsem" <graywyvern@hotmail.com>]

There is i think a fruitful tension in Loban between
the general & the specific. On the one hand it can be
extremely vague with words like ZUKTE, FASNU & GASNU
(writing this way resembles Latin, & seems most lojbanic
but little explored because a lot of us come to it with
a highly specific language like English in our heads);
on the other hand almost any degree of subtlety of
distinction can be made if you only use enough words...

I agree with Jorge that NU can be considered the standard
in almost any conversational usage without loss of meaning.
"Don't be specific unless you are making the distinction"
might become the JBOJBE's watchword someday.

I see two reasons to keep the other cmavo. First, the possibility
of conveying event-contours with ZA'I, MU'E & ZU'O. (There are
other ways of course, but these are most succinct.) To me it
is important sometimes to specify MU'E & not NU because in a
narrative that point will become a reference in the otherwise-
not-closely differentiated continuum of lojbanic temporal
narrative.

Also, (correct me if i'm wrong) aren't these really just sort
of contractions, KA BRODA for CKAJI LE BRODA, NU BRODA for FASNU
LE BRODA, SI'O BRODA for SIDBO LE BRODA, PU'U BRODA for PRUCE LE
BRODA, LI'I BRODA for LIFRI LE BRODA, NI BRODA for KLANI LE BRODA,
& SU'U BRODA for SUCTA LE BRODA? (The others are less obvious:
i agree with a prior poster that JEI BRODA equals DU'U XUKAU
BRODA; DU'U BRODA could be XUSRA or JUFRA LE BRODA; ZU'O BRODA
& MU'E BRODA probably DIKNI ZUKTE LE BRODA & BRODE CEI FASNU
MOKCA. I'm not sure ZA'I BRODA fits into RANJI LE BRODA so well...)

Anyway, my point being that when these distinctions need to be
made, the cmavo should be available & mean things as different as
SIDBO & LIFRI, KLANI & CKAJI, RANJI & MOKCA.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com