From pycyn@aol.com Thu Apr 05 20:05:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_1); 6 Apr 2001 03:05:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 10679 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2001 03:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Apr 2001 03:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m09.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.164) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Apr 2001 04:06:19 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.7c.140f172d (2617) for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2001 23:05:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <7c.140f172d.27fe8c5f@aol.com> Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 23:05:03 EDT Subject: Re: Honorifics [was: Re: [lojban] translation of "Mark" To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7c.140f172d.27fe8c5f_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_7c.140f172d.27fe8c5f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/5/2001 6:58:52 PM Central Daylight Time, graywyvern@hotmail.com writes: > lojbanic honorific. > Hmmmm! They show that you feel respect when speaking, so they give honorific status to whomever you are speaking to, but do they really work on the preceding *word*? If there is no better way, this might work, I suppose. But surely, there is a strictly lexical way that lacks this ambiguity. <(I would stay away from anything CTILE, > even metaphorically.)> > Nah! It's olive oil (with a mixture of herbs and spices -- formula is in Leviticus somewhere, I think). xorxes has noted that {grusa} doesn't give too horrible a compound For what? Misses "lord" completely (ruler, supplier of food in time of need,...) and does nothing for :"ho kyrios" or "adonai" that I can see. And "great in spirit" is too fuzzy to very exact for any purpose, ditto "spiritually great." To be sure, {turni} comes down heavy on the "rules over" part and light on the provider part, but that is pretty much lost in English anyhow ("Lord" is from "hlafward, "protector of bread") and probably has no similar echoes in Hebrew and Greek (though Adonis is the partner of some grain goddess or other) . > > --part1_7c.140f172d.27fe8c5f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/5/2001 6:58:52 PM Central Daylight Time,
graywyvern@hotmail.com writes:



<After the name, either GA'INAI or .IO has the force of a
lojbanic honorific. >




Hmmmm!  They show that you feel respect when speaking, so they give honorific
status to whomever you are speaking to, but do they really work on the
preceding *word*? If there is no better way, this might work, I suppose.  But
surely, there is a strictly lexical way that lacks this ambiguity.

<(I would stay away from anything CTILE,
even metaphorically.)>



Nah! It's olive oil (with a mixture of herbs and spices -- formula is in
Leviticus somewhere, I think).  xorxes has noted that {grusa} doesn't give
too horrible a compound

<PRUXI BANLI seems more exact.>

For what?  Misses "lord" completely (ruler, supplier of food in time of
need,...) and does nothing for :"ho kyrios" or "adonai" that I can see.  And
"great in spirit" is too fuzzy to very exact for any purpose, ditto
"spiritually great."
To be sure, {turni} comes down heavy on the "rules over" part and light on
the provider part, but that is pretty much lost in English anyhow ("Lord" is
from "hlafward, "protector of bread") and probably has no similar echoes in
Hebrew and Greek (though Adonis is the partner of some grain goddess or
other) .






--part1_7c.140f172d.27fe8c5f_boundary--