[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
John: > Invent Yourself scripsit: > > > 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. > > Oho! > > This gives me an idea. > > What if ni is to jei as ka is to du'u? > > le ka ce'u kusru la djim. = the property of being cruel to Jim > le ka la djan. kusru ce'u = the property of being a victim of John's cruelty > le du'u la djan. kusru la djim. = the assertion that John is cruel to Jim > le ka ce'u kusru ce'u = cruelty, the relationship between cruel one and victim > > le ni ce'u kusru la djim = the amount of cruelty to Jim > le ni la djan. ce'u kusru = the amount of being a victim of John > le jei la djan. ce'u la djim. = the degree to which John is cruel to Jim > le ni ce'u kusru ce'u = the amount of cruelty > > I think this is nicely symmetrical, useful, and as consistent with the > past as can be expected. > > Comments? I'm not sure if you silently dropped this idea. I can make no sense of ni + ce'u. > le ni ce'u kusru la djim = the amount of cruelty to Jim ni da kusru la djim > le ni la djan. ce'u kusru = the amount of being a victim of John ni la djan da kusru > le jei la djan. ce'u la djim. = the degree to which John is cruel to Jim (ce'u > kusru) Is the idea here that certain degrees correspond to True and certain degrees to False? > le ni ce'u kusru ce'u = the amount of cruelty ni da kusru da Is there a difference between amounts and degrees? Not that I can trust myself to apply. My opinion on ni: treat ni as a gradient jei: djuno lo'edu'u ma kau jei la djim broda = "know whether djim is broda" = know djim is broda or know djim isn't broda djuno lo'edu'u ma kau ni la djim broda = "know to what extent djim is broda" --And.