[lojban] Re: .aunai and .a'unai

[John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>]

At this point there seems to be agreement that
these attitudinals at least (but surely most ot
the rest too) need some more work.  There is less
agreement about what should happen in these
cases. xorxes' reading that {au} expresses
something rather than claiming it is surely right
(almost by definition for these kinds of words,
which are not even fictive, let alone factive). 
That what {au} expresses is a wish is less clear
as the other suggested readings indicates. We
clearly do need a way to express wishes of the
impersonal sort (i.e., not requests or
suggestions directed at agents) and there does
not seem to be a place for them.  But the other
suggestions also seem to be useful things to have
and are not covered in any obvious way.
Using {a'u} for interest in the ordinary sense
does not fit the pattern very well (no neutral
ground in this category, repulsion is not the
opposite, etc.), though, again, this is a notion
that deserves some mark.  The {a'unai} example
offered suggests that {a'u} ought to be
"attractive" or some such -- again a needed but
perhaps unavailable form (though something like
{ui} is close in some cases.  It should also be
noted that some of the attitudes which there are
words to express seems to be ones that we do not
express (are not really attitudes, maybe):
cowardice, for example, or competence.  So there
is room for a rearrangement of terms to be more
inclusive and more unified.  Not a real
possibility, of course.