From rob@twcny.rr.com Wed Jun 13 18:10:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 14 Jun 2001 01:10:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 48559 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2001 01:10:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Jun 2001 01:10:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.120) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Jun 2001 01:10:30 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.2/RoadRunner 1.03) with ESMTP id f5E194812186 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:09:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from riff ([24.95.175.101]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:09:04 -0400 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15ALaT-0000R2-00 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:06:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 21:06:17 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] gismu for attitudinals Message-ID: <20010613210617.A1616@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 12:18:50AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote: > >.a'e mi cikna ku'i lenu ... > > I don't know. I assume you mean {ki'u}, but I would think > {a'e} marks what you are alert about, rather than why you are > alert, or what made you alert. I don't recall seeing it in > use though. Very true. I couldn't think of how to express this right considering that {cikna} only has one place. And to top it all off I let in a bit of Lojbanic dyslexia. :P > >.ai mi ba gasnu lenu ... > > I prefer {mi zukte fi le nu ...} That works. > >.e'e mi certu lenu ... > > This is not how I use {e'e}, and I have been using it often lately > (including in the Alice translation). I use it in the sense of > "encouragement", "you can do it!", "go for it!". This also fits > with the rest of the e-series as imperative-types. Here we see one case where these bridi "translations" don't work at all. The subject can be something other than {mi}. But actually, wouldn't "e'edai" be more appropriate for "you can do it"? > >.e'i mi rinju fi lenu ... > > There is one other imperative-type that I have often felt the need > for. I haven't found a simple way to express the "I dare you!" > attitude. I am always very tempted to enlist {e'i} for this service, > although it is harder to twist the keyword to fit it. Certainly... I can't see how it fits. But I can't see {e'idai} meaning anything else that is useful, so perhaps that could be what it means. > >.ei mi bilga lenu ... > > {ei} is much more general than that. More like > {mi cinmo le nu le munje cu bilga le nu...} ei is one case where the subject is often something other than {mi}, true. -- Rob Speer