From jjllambias@hotmail.com Fri Nov 02 12:23:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 2 Nov 2001 20:23:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 87741 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 20:23:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Nov 2001 20:23:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.105) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Nov 2001 20:23:03 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 12:23:03 -0800 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:23:03 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: hardly Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 20:23:03 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov 2001 20:23:03.0515 (UTC) FILETIME=[2C9742B0:01C163DC] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la aulun cusku di'e > > I have been using {ja'aru'e} for this, and {naru'e} for "almost". > >I never could much appreciate the need/help of {ru'e}, as an >attitudinal-emotional, in compounds with a bridi affirmer or >negation. I don't think {ru'e} should be confused with an emotion. It attenuates the meaning of the preceding word, just as {sai} intensifies it. It can be used with emotions but also with other words. >.i smaji ga'u ro cmana >.i ne'i ro ricycpana >caku seltirna >fa ji'ino nunva'u >.i lei ricyne'i cmacipni >puzaku de'a grisa'a >.i doido'u ko denpa le li'i >ji'a do bazi sipna .i ba'a Very nice! Do you really mean {li'i ji'a} or {do ji'a}? >I tried to use {ji'ino} here (although referring to {no}, it doesn't >seem to be "almost nothing" rather than something like +/- zero >i.e. also covering negative values which isn't appropriate for normal >speech). I think it works well. Negative values are excluded because they don't make sense as quantifiers. >Will still have to think about it. Quantifiers can go with sumti (I >hardly can see a house/I can see almost no house. I can hardly see/I >can see next to nothing); but what's with selbri? (I could hardly >sleep -> I had almost no sleep; this trick isn't always at hand). There could be lots and lots of things that I can hardly see, so "hardly see" is not the same as "see hardly anything". We have different ways of doing the quantifier "hardly any", but I think we have to use {ru'e} to say that the bridi barely holds. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp