[CONLANG] Re: Re: Láadan
|From:||Davis, Iain E. <feaelin@...>|
|Date:||Monday, December 2, 2002, 19:27|
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Muke Tever [mailto:mktvr@COMCAST.NET]
> > >lirini an achievement that seems small to other, but means
> a lot to
> > >the achiever
> > > Yes!
> > Yes, but isn't it rather deprecatory (is that a word?)--
> > Case 1) A. This is my lirini!
> > B) (thinks) Hmm, you reinvented the wheel......
> > Case 2) A. What a nice lirini for you (thinks: nyah, so what?)
> I think the intended use is more along the lines of "I know
> it doesn't matter to you, but this is something I have to
> do"... You probably wouldn't say the first case, although the
Or perhaps "I have done this, it's a significant achievement, but I understand
that you won't understand the technical mumb-jumbo behind it."
My wife and I experience this very often. We're both in careers that are largely
un-understandable to each other (Microbiology, and computing), so when either
of say "I did blah blah blah", without some extended explaination, we generally
don't know the value of the achievement.
> I think "scapegoat" has the added implication that the person
> didn't do what they're being blamed for.
I agree. But then, anything that assigns blame in english has a negative connotation.
> > >radodelh non-interface, a situation which has not one
> single point in
> > >common on which to base interaction, often used of
> personal relationships
> > > ?
> > How can there be a relationship if there are no points in common?
> Sounds like most of mine.
What does it mean by "points in common" hobbies? Ideology? Interests? All?
> > >ralith to deliberately refrain from thinking about
> something, to wall
> > >if off in one's mind by deliberate act
> > > Yes
> > "Denial"
> Hmm, "denial" here means to believe or claim something true
> is not true, as either a coping mechanism or a response to accusation.
Exactly, and as such, is not a good word choice in english for the meaning above.
A good example is that thinking about a terrible tasting meal that I had once
can cause me to relive it. I don't deny that the meal was nasty tasting, but
since there is no value in reliving the experience, I prefer to not think about
in what way the meal was nasty tasting.
On the other hand, if I lied to myself that the meal was a good one, and
effectively substituted thoughts of good food for the actual nasty food, that
would be "denial", at least as it is used in this context.
> > >shol absence-of-pain
> > > Yes!
> > "analgesia" or "anaesthesia"
> That seems more like the suppresion of pain? (or feeling
> entirely, for anaesthesia)... and I dont think either would
> apply to mental pain.
I agree. :)
> > >wonewith to be socially dyslexic; uncomprehending of the social
> > >signals of others
> > > Yes!
> > "Clueless" Kash cakondrop 'deliberately obtuse' come close....
> No, because I think one can manage to be competent, while
> still unable to interact properly with others...
I agree that with "clueless"'s current nuance, it probably doesn't fit properly,
since if I said "That person is clueless", it wouldn't tell you what they're
clueless about. If I said "That person is socially inept", you would get a
vague idea, but still not the meaning I see above. "Socially blind" comes to
mind. "Uncomprehending" here doesn't mean incompetence, it means the clues that
many of us rely on ("body language") to signal the emotional state of a speaker