From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Jul 09 16:11:24 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19081 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2000 23:11:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Jul 2000 23:11:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.92) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jul 2000 23:11:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 99449 invoked by uid 0); 9 Jul 2000 23:11:23 -0000 Message-ID: <20000709231123.99448.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.154.142 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 09 Jul 2000 16:11:23 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.154.142] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: Tashunkekokipapi - Man-afraid-of his-horses Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 16:11:23 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la aulun cusku di'e >So, I could imagine that an attitudinal also is allowed being >part of a name (e.g. expressing a parents joyful surprise "Oh, >it's a boy!"). Where's the cmene there? Even if you mean something like {doi nanla ui}, the attitudinal is attached to the name, not part of the name. If it were a part of the name it would not show any joy the speaker might feel. Indeed the speaker could feel sadness with respect to someone whose name contained the attitudinal {ui}. This is uncharted territory, but I doubt that we want to let attitudinals be part of names. >/ji'a/ (additionally) IMHO doesn't give the whole sense of "even". I agree, it is only part of the sense. That's why I used {ji'acai}. It is not just one more thing, but the last and least likely one, and with {cai} I try to point to this extremeness. >It >even doesn't hit the very sense of "also". Well, it means "also", "too", "as well" by definition. The connection with {jmina} is merely mnemonic. You don't have to think of it as specially restricted to the English word "additionally", either. >"also" gives the idea of >an action/event/status etc. at least one time 'paralleled' in a >similar/equal manner (but without any aspect of expectation or >surprise like in "additionally" with the idea of a surplus). If you see that sense in "also" maybe you can use {si'a} for it. To me it is pure {ji'a}. >But >"even" always has the connotation of surprise (.ue ?), something >beyond expectation or unusual (and - as you already pointed out >earlier - maybe something at the boundaries of contextual >semantics). "Even" does point to a contrast, but it is not surprise. You can say things like "he is so fearsome that it is not surprising that even his horse brings fear to his enemies". It is as if you are pointing to a long string of things that bring fear to his enemies: his person, and also his presence, and also his strength, and also his weapons, and finally even his horse. By saying "even his horse" you are including all the other things that are more likely than his horse to bring fear to his enemies. >BTW, "mi viska la nanmu poi le xirma po ke'a..." shouldn't I better >write: "mi viska la nanmu poi le xirma po ke'axire..." ??? No, why? Isn't {ke'axire} used for a second embedded clause? Here you have only one. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com