On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Daniel Brockman
<daniel@brockman.se> wrote:
What we could do about {ba'a cu'i} is turn it into a separate cmavo.
Then we get to define another variant of it as well (its opposite):
ba'u'i = I experience
ba'u'i nai = I imagine/fantasize about
.i ba'u'i nai mabla zgike = I have this awful song stuck in my head
We have the same issues with the event contour, bu'ocu'i, don't we? I'm quite willing to say that [na]cu'i/ru'e/sai/cai are context dependent, in the same way that "jai" or "bo" do different things in different contexts. There is no reason why lojban can't have cmavo"idioms" that aren't necessarily necessarily parseable in meaning by their components. Lujvo, for example, already and explicitly are this. Some things are already in common use, for example za'u roi
This is probably heresy, though...
--gejyspa