Re: Mark's proposed "ja'ai" already exists

5 views
Skip to first unread message

ma...@kli.org

unread,
Aug 23, 1999, 11:47:38 PM8/23/99
to
>From: John Cowan <co...@locke.ccil.org>
>Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 00:03:42 -0400 (EDT)
>
>From: John Cowan <co...@locke.ccil.org>
>
>Blunderingly I wrote:
>
>> >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.)
>
>Mark Shoulson hrmphed:
>
>> 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.
>
>Oops. jo'a is the counterpart of na'i indeed. There is no counterpart
>of nai; jo'a = na'inai.

'Zactly. That's what {ja'ai} is: another cmavo of selma'o NAI, the
counterpart to {nai}. Just as {ja'a} is to {na}, {ja'ai} is to {nai}.

~mark

John Cowan

unread,
Aug 24, 1999, 12:03:42 AM8/24/99
to
Blunderingly I wrote:

> >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.)

Mark Shoulson hrmphed:

> 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.

Oops. jo'a is the counterpart of na'i indeed. There is no counterpart
of nai; jo'a = na'inai.

--
John Cowan co...@ccil.org
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin

ma...@kli.org

unread,
Aug 23, 1999, 11:11:55 PM8/23/99
to
>From: John Cowan <co...@locke.ccil.org>
>Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 13:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
>
>From: John Cowan <co...@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

John Cowan

unread,
Aug 23, 1999, 1:59:59 PM8/23/99
to
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.)

--

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages