I wonder how you would have defined vamji's argument structure if you had never seen vamji's definition as it stands in the gimste.
I'm probably already too contaminated by it to contemplate that, but I'd probably drop x4, at least. :)As one who is uncontaminated (meaning: seeing the definition of vamji for the very first time), I can say that upon reading the definition I first thought of the old phrase "My kingdom for a horse!" I havn't a clue to the phrases origins, but I understand it comes in the context of a defeated king pleading to his conquerors, saying that he is willing to exchange his entire kingdom to his conquerors for the price of a horse for him to flee on.
To put the phrase in terms of vamji: [a horse] is equivalent in worth to [a kingdom] to a [defeated king] for the use of [fleeing upon].
I can't make out how "appreciation" would apply in x4, and I expect x4 would be used infrequently (hence, x4 is a good place for it I suppose.) Although, upon further reflection, I'd initially taken "appreciation" in the sense of "gratefulness". At it's barest, "appreciation" means "a full understanding of the meaning and importance of something." (for example: Since I bought the farm, I've gained an appreciation for spring rain.) This sense of "appreciation" is similar to "evaluation" but evaluation implies an impartial valuing of a thing, while "appreciation" implies that the thing is already valued to a certain degree.
With that distinction in mind, perhaps the x1 place names the "certain degree" to which x2 is already valued in the eyes of x3, and x4 names the understanding by which x3 so values x2? This understanding will generally be described in terms of a thing's usefulness - hence "use". So x4 could act sort of like a "by standard" place?
I guess I would fill x4 *in general* with the standard by which x3 values x2 the way he/she does in comparison to the amount {ni} of x1. By this interpretation, I think my "My kingdom for a horse!" analogy still stands.
mi'e .neit. mu'o