We should distinguish the way mabla is used from the way it is officially defined. mabla cannot mean "this selbri is used in a derogatory fashion", because components of lujvo are not used to make comments on the lujvo they form, much less on its use. The actual usage definition of mabla is something like
"x1 is deplorable/wretched/shitty/awful/rotten/miserable/contemptible/
/crappy/inferior/low-quality in property x2 by standard x3;
x1 stinks/sucks in aspect x2 according to x3"
The official definition is something that could be used to talk about language, but it is not what corresponds to the actual usage of the word. mabla, in usage if not officially, is a derogatory word, it doesn't mean "is a derogatory word". (The same applies to zabna.) --xorxes
x3 is the person who holds x2 in contempt. --pne
That is correct for the official definition. But in usage, mabla is used by the derogator, to derogate, not by a third party talking about a derogator who derogates. It is used as a swear word, not to talk about swear words.
Just how offensive is mabla? If, for example, I put the phrase ".o'onai xu do po'u le selmabla cu baupli la lojban " in my .sig, would I be offending people overmuch? (Think Pulp Fiction) Of course, five nines of the population would have no idea they were being insulted, but would fellow lojbanists be offended? -Skorgu