[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, And Rosta wrote:
> If each possible value of ni corresponds to a value of jei in a determinate
> way, and if there is some way to describe values of ni in terms of the
> value of jei that they correspond to, then we can do without jei.
> Instead of {li pa jei broda}, say {lo value-corresponding-to-True cu ni
> broda}.
ok.
> #> But as far as I can see there's nothing ugly about ni per se. Rather,
> #> just as the ka/du'u distinction does not exist, so it can be argued
> #> that the ni/jei distinction can be dispensed with. We just end up
> #> with two redundant cmavo.
> #
> #At least ka means a special case of du'u; one with su'o zo ce'u. ni
> #doesn't even offer us that much. And it's interpreted in all crazy ways:
> #if I were to describe real usage, I'd have to admit it's usually used to
> #count xo ko'a!
>
> I'll readily believe the usage is bad. But do you not agree that {ni}
> means "the extent/degree to which", and that's a relatively useful
> notion?
If you take that a step further, you'll see the logical error.
If ni uses ce'u, then it can't express "the degree to which", because
that's an abstraction of a filled bridi. If ni doesn't need ce'u, then it
makes sense, but loses its symmetry with ka, and becomes completely
identical to jei.
ni ko'a xunre: the degree to which A is red
ni ce'u xunre: the degree to which anything is red <-- makes no sense
If ni and jei are redundant, ni should be the one to go: it is roundly
abused, it seems to expect a ce'u but shouldn't have one, and its values
are not defined to be in [0, 1] like jei is, and it doesn't have the usage
history of working like jei.
By "go" I don't mean that it should be removed from the baseline, but that
people should stop using it -- or confine its use completely to counting!
--
Before Sept. 11 there was not the present excited talk about a strike
on Iraq. There is no evidence of any connection between Iraq and that
act of terrorism. Why would that event change the situation?
-- Howard Zinn