BPFK Super-Section: BAI sumtcita

From Lojban
Revision as of 16:43, 4 November 2013 by Gleki (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

bi'ai [CAhA] must be: modal aspect: necesary attribute

bi'ai is equivalent to na ka'e na (that is naku ka'eku naku for those who value the book's prescriptions above common sense). It's proposed for the sake of symmetry. (cf. bilga, CAhA as sumtcita)

.ianaicai .i ma smuni le si'o da na ka'enai broda

ka'enai does not mean the same as ka'e na, it means na ka'e.

ka'e na means that the negative is possible. na ka'e and ka'enai, on the other hand, negate the possibility. --xorxes

---> scope of tenses and NA

What is the symmetry?

bi'ai = na ka'e na = ka'e nai na = not capable of not

na bi'ai = bi'ai nai = ka'e na = capable of not

bi'ai na = na ka'e = ka'e nai = not capable of

na bi'ai na = bi'ai nai na = ka'e = capable of

Why only a cmavo for na ka'e na and not na ca'a na etc.?

--And Rosta

The symmetry is with other such constructs in the language. Just as it is much easier to say ro broda than naku su'o broda naku, it is much easier to say bi'aiku than naku ka'eku naku. A cmavo is not proposed for na ca'a na, because there does not seem to be any interesting difference between na ca'a and ca'a na. For the record, it was me who originally proposed this cmavo. -- Adam