Re: [lojban] Re: [jbovlaste] malranxi

["A. PIEKARSKI" <totus@rogers.com>]

----- Original Message ----
> From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
> To: lojban-list@lojban.org
> Sent: Fri, December 4, 2009 10:09:57 AM
> Subject: [lojban] Re: [jbovlaste] malranxi
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:40 AM, A. PIEKARSKI wrote:
> >
> >> so I suggest "raxsku"
> >> "x1 says x2 to x3 via medium x4, which is ironic/contrary to
> >> expectation (that x1 would say what they really mean, the usual
> >> expectation when someone says something)
> >>
> >> I'm not sure what the x3 aspect of ranxi would be in this case.
> >>
> > Is this how you would write it?
> >
> > {c1 cusku c2 c3 c4 .ijebo lonu go'i cu ranxi lonu so'eda tersmu le go'e}
> > {c1 raxsku c2 c3 c4}
> 
> What's "le go'e"?

Well, both {go'i} and {go'e} were meant to refer to {c1 cusku c2 c3 c4 }.

> 
> I would say:
> 
> ko'a cusku ko'e ko'i ko'o .ije la'e di'u ranxi lo nu na cusku lo to'e
> se smuni be lo se jinvi
> 
> As for the x3 of "ranxi", I now think that what characterizes this
> type of irony has to be something like "intentional", or "intentional
> for effect", as opposed to ironic situations that just happen to be
> ironic unintentionally.
> 
Could be.  But in any case it gets dropped in the formulation of the lujvo.

totus