BPFK Section: Intensifiers Posted by xorxes on Tue 05 of Aug, 2008 13:38 GMT posts: 1912 Use this thread to discuss the page:: BPFK Section: Intensifiers
Posted by Eimi on Mon 29 of Sep, 2008 19:30 GMT posts: 18 > Use this thread to discuss the page:: BPFK Section: Intensifiers I like the general direction, but the definition of {pei} doesn't seem adequate. In particular, the definition have any indication (to my reading) that when {pei} is applied to a UI, it is the listener's emotion and not the speaker's that is being asked about. Similarly, the {fi'i pei} example only works if the same reversal applies to CAI. The Book doesn't mention that, so it is a change, though I think it is an entirely proper one to make. Finally, the meaning of {pei} *not* after a UI (or CAI) has always been considered a question not just about intensity, but more of a "What attitudinal belongs here?", and the stated definition here doesn't seem to include that at all.
Posted by arj on Sun 19 of Oct, 2008 17:56 GMT posts: 953 I'm not entirely happy with this. The Impact section appeals to usage ("This doesn't seem to be exactly in line with usage"), but no analysis of usage appears elsewhere in the section. The definitions refer to "the previous word", but this is unnecessary, because CAI is an indicator, and as such is covered by the same preface as ordinary UI cmavo. If there are no objections, I'll start rewriting the section next week.
Posted by arj on Sun 26 of Oct, 2008 13:17 GMT posts: 953 I am trying to find usage data of CAI that is not attached to a UI. Unfortunately, such usages seems to completely drowned by the typical case, that is, UI+CAI strings. Anyone able to come up with a search that can show "bare" CAI? arj@gavagai:~/Lojban$ grep -c -w "cai" all_logs.txt 257 arj@gavagai:~/Lojban$ grep -c -w "sai" all_logs.txt 2241 arj@gavagai:~/Lojban$ grep -c -w "cu'i" all_logs.txt 438 arj@gavagai:~/Lojban$ grep -c -w "ru'e" all_logs.txt 904 -arj
Posted by arj on Sun 16 of Nov, 2008 10:43 GMT posts: 953 There are currently two people who have voted against this section. Can the two of you please re-evaluate the section, and if necessary, suggest possible changes?
Posted by rlpowell on Mon 17 of Nov, 2008 20:09 GMT posts: 14214 The definitions refer to "the preface" repeatedly, without actually saying what that is. -Robin
Posted by Eimi on Tue 25 of Nov, 2008 15:35 GMT posts: 18 Since there seems to be a consensus forming around COIpei, I've gone ahead and changed the page back to explicitly mention that vocatives are treated like indicators, for all CAI. Note that {nu'e cu'i} and {ju'i cu'i} already have definitions attached to them, so {cu'i} at the very least needs to affect vocatives. Extending that to the rest of CAI seems to be the way to proceed. Please revote, and if you object to either the intent or the wording please say so now!
