Posts and uploaded files are owned by the poster. jbotcan.org is not liable for the content submitted by the poster. Downloading any poster-submitted files is doing so at your own risk.
Can I say "I am mentally and emotionally happy" just by ".uiro'ero'i", or do I need a more complex contstruct? How can I say that I feel something oriented to: myself, you, someone else, and the various types of us?How can I say that I feel an emotion toward feeling another emotion. For example, I want to say "I am happy to love you", but "do .ui .iu" or something wouldn't work, right?Can I apply an emotional intensity marker ("sai", for example) to a modifier (such as "ga'i")?Last, how would I express an emotion toward a vocative, discursive, or evidential?
Can I say "I am mentally and emotionally happy" just by ".uiro'ero'i", or do I need a more complex contstruct? How can I say that I feel something oriented to: myself, you, someone else, and the various types of us?
How can I say that I feel an emotion toward feeling another emotion. For example, I want to say "I am happy to love you", but "do .ui .iu" or something wouldn't work, right?
Can I apply an emotional intensity marker ("sai", for example) to a modifier (such as "ga'i")?
Last, how would I express an emotion toward a vocative, discursive, or evidential?
I don't know about the first few questions but I believe that attitudinals apply to the immediately preceding word (or to the whole bridi if at the beginning or after the [vau]).So, (I could be wrong but), I believe that {mi pu .uicai klama fi lo zarci} is saying that I came from the store (and am really happy about the fact that my coming is in the past). In the same way you would just need to use the terminators appropriately in order to do things like {coi djan do'u uicai} which would mean "hi john (and I'm really happy about my greeting you)"
I don't know about the first few questions but I believe that attitudinals apply to the immediately preceding word (or to the whole bridi if at the beginning or after the [vau]).
So, (I could be wrong but), I believe that {mi pu .uicai klama fi lo zarci} is saying that I came from the store (and am really happy about the fact that my coming is in the past). In the same way you would just need to use the terminators appropriately in order to do things like {coi djan do'u uicai} which would mean "hi john (and I'm really happy about my greeting you)"
>>1312Yes, in "uiro'ero'i", "ro'e" and "ro'i" both modify "ui".By "oriented to X", what do you mean? The emotion is caused by X? The emotion is felt by X? The emotion benefits X? Something else?In "do ui iu", both attitudinals are about "do". So, "I am happy about you, and I love you." "fu'e ui do iu [fu'o]" might express what you want, and "mi prami ui do" definitely does. These methods are also how one expresses emotions towards evidentials or discursives. "fu'e" and "fu'o" are described here: http://jbotcan.org/docs/cll/c19/s8.htmlYes, intensity markers can be applied to modifiers.
>>1312
Yes, in "uiro'ero'i", "ro'e" and "ro'i" both modify "ui".
By "oriented to X", what do you mean? The emotion is caused by X? The emotion is felt by X? The emotion benefits X? Something else?
In "do ui iu", both attitudinals are about "do". So, "I am happy about you, and I love you." "fu'e ui do iu [fu'o]" might express what you want, and "mi prami ui do" definitely does. These methods are also how one expresses emotions towards evidentials or discursives. "fu'e" and "fu'o" are described here: http://jbotcan.org/docs/cll/c19/s8.html
Yes, intensity markers can be applied to modifiers.
>>1312 If an attitudinal modifier can be used to modify evidentials and the like, then what does an initial "sai" mean? Is it "ge'esai" or could that "sai" actually refer to an unstated evidential?
If an attitudinal modifier can be used to modify evidentials and the like, then what does an initial "sai" mean? Is it "ge'esai" or could that "sai" actually refer to an unstated evidential?
>>1338ge'e is an unspecified UI (or CAI, possibly), so it could represent an unspecified evidential or discursive as well as an unspecified emotion or modifier. Technically, a CAI with no preceding UI modifies an elided UI, but some people have taken to using this construction to modify the previous word, e.g., "klina ru'e" for "weakly transparent".I don't really understand why CAI is a separate selma'o from UI. They occupy the same place in the official grammar. CAI should either be merged with UI, or all the modifiers should be moved to CAI and the grammar be altered to differentiate between UI and CAI.
>>1338
ge'e is an unspecified UI (or CAI, possibly), so it could represent an unspecified evidential or discursive as well as an unspecified emotion or modifier. Technically, a CAI with no preceding UI modifies an elided UI, but some people have taken to using this construction to modify the previous word, e.g., "klina ru'e" for "weakly transparent".
I don't really understand why CAI is a separate selma'o from UI. They occupy the same place in the official grammar. CAI should either be merged with UI, or all the modifiers should be moved to CAI and the grammar be altered to differentiate between UI and CAI.
>>1312 Might as well attach it to this thread.If I say <<zo'o mi do .iu prami>>, ignoring/apart from the slight (and arguable) redundancy of zo <<.iu>>, how would zo <<zo'o>> modify zo <<.iu>>?Would it be similar to <<.iu to zo'o toi>> (under Selkik's system); or would they just be independent, similar to <<do .iu zo'o>>?
Might as well attach it to this thread.
If I say <<zo'o mi do .iu prami>>, ignoring/apart from the slight (and arguable) redundancy of zo <<.iu>>, how would zo <<zo'o>> modify zo <<.iu>>?
Would it be similar to <<.iu to zo'o toi>> (under Selkik's system); or would they just be independent, similar to <<do .iu zo'o>>?
>>1312 What does <<ro'i>> apply to in <<fu'ero'i .oi .ii .uu fu'o>>? Does <<ro'i>> apply to some <<ge'e>>, or to everything within the brackets?What about <<fu'e .oi .ii .uu fu'oro'i>>?
What does <<ro'i>> apply to in <<fu'ero'i .oi .ii .uu fu'o>>? Does <<ro'i>> apply to some <<ge'e>>, or to everything within the brackets?
What about <<fu'e .oi .ii .uu fu'oro'i>>?
>>1342I think "zo'o" modifies "mi do iu prami", and "iu" modifies "do".>>1344I think "ro'i oi ii uu" modifies everything up to the next "fu'o" (in this case, nothing).Same with "fu'e oi ii uu fu'oro'i": "oi ii uu" modifies nothing. And I have no idea what "ro'i" modifies here. Possibly whatever preceeds the string of indicators.The internal grammar of indicators hasn't been formalized, as far as I know. The only constraint seems to be that "fu'e" can only appear at the head of a string of indicators.
>>1342
I think "zo'o" modifies "mi do iu prami", and "iu" modifies "do".
>>1344
I think "ro'i oi ii uu" modifies everything up to the next "fu'o" (in this case, nothing).
Same with "fu'e oi ii uu fu'oro'i": "oi ii uu" modifies nothing. And I have no idea what "ro'i" modifies here. Possibly whatever preceeds the string of indicators.
The internal grammar of indicators hasn't been formalized, as far as I know. The only constraint seems to be that "fu'e" can only appear at the head of a string of indicators.