Re: Beyond Whorf: "things," "qualities," and the origin of nouns and adjectives

["Alfred W. Tueting (Tüting)" <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>]

--- In lojban@egroups.com, Ivan A Derzhanski <iad@M...> wrote:

> > (The 'picture' of the blue-eyed beauty seems
> > stronger than that of the dark-eyed - "...akinek a szeme fekete" -
> > because of syntactically  coming first in order?)
> 
> Syntactically?  How's that?

It's "Az a szép, az a szép akinek a széme kék - * akinek
a szeme fekete*", yet, the latter doesn't seem to be kept in mind!

> For the record, the traditional Bulgarian idea of female beauty,
> perpetuated in innumerable folk songs, expressly calls for black
> eyes and fair hair (compared to diamonds and gold respectively).

The topic blue eyes vs. dark (black) eyes is also pretty common in
Romanian songs - not only in folk songs but also in poetical 
"romances" (romant,e): "Doi ochi odata am intilnit...", "Am iubit doi
ochi albastri..."
In my opinion, adoration of "black-eyed blondes" seems to go back to
romanticism (e.g. Gérard de Nerval: "Fantaisie. ...Puis, une 
dame à sa haute fenêtre/ *blonde, aux yeux noirs*, en ses
habits ancients...") more preserved in eastern Europe than in Germany 
etc. E.g. reading Mihai Eminescu's poetry, one very often meets the
"dark-eyed blondes" (very often compared to adored (passed 
away) beings and  angels visiting the poet in his fevery dreams):
"Basmul ce l-as spune ei. ... Ai da-ncet neagra marama de pe *
paru-ti blond*, curat ... Acel inger!... Fata pala,/ *Ochiul negru,
par balai*..." or "De ce sa mori tu? ... Sterge-ti ochii, *blonda 
Marta... ochii-ti negri*..."
Eastern people are indeed different...

> 
> But yes, there is this meaning of `beautiful' when nouned.  Let
> us count them: (1) `beauty', the abstract quality (cf. Chinese);
> (2) `the beautiful' as an abstract concept (similar to the first,
> but perhaps not the same); (3) `beautiful thing' (any sort of thing,
> not necessarily physical), the vanilla meaning of {lo melbi}; (4)
> `beautiful (young) woman' (metaphorically extendable).
> 
> Can (2) also be called {lo melbi}, you ask?  Well, X is {lo melbi}
> iff {X melbi}.  Is `the beautiful (in our life)' itself beautiful?

Careful analysis! Yet - doesn't it seem so that lojban and Chinese
are pretty similar in semantics?! /lo melbi/ (the *real existing* 
beautiful *things* etc. not an abstract beauty) and all the Chinese
expressions for pretty "concrete" beautiful things intertwined 
with reality (the beauty of a woman, a tree, a robe, the
morning/evening breeze, a certain flower in the morning/evening etc.,
the 
moon in a special situation to a specific time in the year etc. - not
at all an abstract! Remember that Chinese language originally 
didn't have abstract concepts, e.g. freedom - even "Tao/Dao" is
concrete)

.aulun.