From mark@xxx.xxx Mon Aug 23 20:11:55 1999
X-Digest-Num: 219
Message-ID: <44114.219.1185.959273825@eGroups.com>
Date: 24 Aug 1999 03:11:55 -0000
From: mark@xxx.xxx
Subject: Re: Mark's proposed "ja'ai" already exists

>From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
>
>From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
>
>There is already a positive analogue to "nai", and that is "jo'a".
>It can be attached to attitudes to make them explicitly positive,
>or used as a general metalinguistic affirmer: this is so, despite
>appearances otherwise.
>
>Grammatically "jo'a" belongs to UI rather than NAI, but that simply
>means it cannot be used in place of the non-attitudinal uses of "nai",
>such as with connectives, tenses, etc. (In practice if you want
>to say ".ejo'a" it is grammatical 99% of the time.)

Hrmph. I'm not sure I'm satisfied. If ja'o means the same as my proposed
ja'ai, then na'i must be the same as nai.

~mark