Re: Words for relationships that don't have good analogues in English

On 10/17/07, Roger Mills <rfmilly@...> wrote:
> kambra (close friend, no sex)
> kambraci (+dim.) closer, perhaps occasional sexual relations
Could you give examples of what 'close' vs 'closer' might mean, if sex
is not a necessary factor?

> karande (+le < leñ 'good') definitely implies a sexual relationship, though
> not a committed one,
Ambiguous - is that it definitely implies that it's non-committed, or
it doesn't *necessarily* imply that it's committed?

> anjetre umut (public, general) civil marriage (common)
> anjetre çehamaka (spiritual) religious marriage (rarer, only after "years of
> practice" :-)  )
Could you elaborate on this? I presume you are referring to your
conculture; how does it (normally or otherwise) sanction marriage? Can
one have legal without religious *and* vice versa?

> luç ~luçi jocular but somewhat disrespectful term for one's spouse or
> significant other (< luçu 'to mate, of animals')
*laugh*

> I like this one:
> tisa:  formal 2nd pers. pronoun, commoner-to-aristocrat, formerly used in a
> close, most often M/M sexual relationship; sometimes, when the person of
> lesser status was the sexually dominant partner, it would be the aristocrat
> who used it, albeit often ironically; nowadays, while somewhat rare, it is
> used by either partner, almost always with clear humorous or ironic intent.
> (ult. < sisa 'love[r]')
/me likes it too.

If I'm reading the derivation correctly... 2p (archaic?) formal
pronoun, just generally, is derived from 'love(r)'? That is a bit...
unusual. ;)

Why only used in a m/m relationship? Do you have a history of these
being associated with inter-class relationships? Any particular social
connotations to being dominant? (And are you distinguishing 'dominant'
/ 'submissive' from 'top' / 'bottom'? Viz.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_and_bottom_in_sex_and_BDSM> [never
thought I'd use that link *here* :-P])

- Sai

Reply