Re: Evolving shades of meaning (was Re: LUNATIC again)
|From:||Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, November 8, 1998, 5:18|
/Joe Mondello wrote:
> This is why, in my projects, i often write several synoyms for adjectives into
> the language, then gradually in usage create a change in meaning.
> eg. BEFORE: gluun, tref, thush: new
> AFTER: gluun: new
> tref: innovative, never before seen.
> thush: variant, a [new] member of a [new] subcategory
> does anyone else do this?
> pacs precs
> joe Mondello
Interesting method. I may have to use that. In my first project I did
that on accident. I'd forget that I had created a word for something,
so I'd recreate it, later I'd assign variations to that. Such
differences aren't hard for me. What's harder is lumping words together
in a logical way, i.e., deciding which distinctions made in English to
get rid of, and, even harder still, to completely redraw the semantic
borders. My favorite example from W. is la'u/kapati'. La'u and kapati'
both can be translated as "eat, drink, smoke, etc.". They involve the
in-take of any substance thru the mouth. La'u is used in social
settings (eating and drinking with a community, for example), while
kapati' is used in non-social settings (an exile eating, for example, or
an animal eating). I have other examples of that, where two or three
words will fail to make a distinction made in English, while
incorporating a distinction which English ignores.
"It has occured to me more than once that holy boredom is good and
sufficient reason for the invention of free will." - "Lord Leto II"
(Dune Chronicles, by Frank Herbert)
ICQ #: 18656696
AOL screen-name: NikTailor