Re: Personal Conjugation based on Closeness
|Date:||Friday, March 28, 2003, 21:34|
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthaey Angosii" <arthaey@...>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: Personal Conjugation based on Closeness
> Emaelivpeith HS Teoh:
> >Wow. This begins to sound like the approximately 150 different terms
> >Chinese has for various relatives, which is the source of 50% of the
> >conversations/arguments at family reunions... *shudder*.
> Ooo, do tell me more. :)
> >Muahahaha, the Ebisedi know where you live! :-P
> And will come get me through your fountain-things (which I can't for the
> life of me remember the names of, and yes, searching the archives is just
> far too hard -- open a browse? pah! <grin> )? Yeah, well, you come invade
> us, we'll sic our flying noodles on you. ;)
> >It's just convention that you use them in the order ki-, cu-, and ro-.
> Ahh, I remember you talking about those prefixes before.
> >Note, though, that they have come to acquire specialized meanings:
> > ki- "the former"
> > cu- "the current (or the latter)"
> > ro- "the other"
> Good way to translate them. I hadn't thought of that.
> >people won't anticipate which nouns need tagging!), but you use the
> >former/latter/other meaning and put the tag on the first pronoun that
> >refers back to that noun.
> In which case, it's more like Asha'ille than I first thought. :)
> >The tags are optional. Of course, you'll have to make good use of them if
> >you want people to understand what you're talking about! :-)
> Unless you're practicing your bureaurocrat-speak, that is. <grin>
> >OK, Ebisedian doesn't distinguish between direct and indirect discourse,
> The difference between the two is stuff like
> "He said, 'Blah blah.' " versus
> "He said blah blah."
> Right? Asha'ille uses the equivalent of saying "quote unquote" todistinguish.
AFAIK, Ebisedian doesn't distinguish, but does use equivalents of "quote
unquote". Sorry, answering for Teoh here.