Re: TECH: lujvo : tutuear

[Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>]

To Logical Language Group respond I thus:

#Mark opined and Jorge agreed that "tutear" did not need a lujvo.  I will
#agree that it does not need a SHORT lujvo.  However, it is a concept
#that is not limited to one language, or even a family of languages - the
#habit of addressing some individuals with a formal pronoun

#We need a good lujvo for 'address' (i.e. vocatively talking to some
#one).  If we have this lujvo, then (if we could rely on the English
#description of what is going on) slabydon-[address] vs
#clitydon-[address] would be satisfactory

Well, let's see.

donvla = word for 'you'
donvlapli = use word for 'you' in the context of talking to...

so: zoify. tu fy. donvla fy.
.i mi donvlapli zoify tu fy lenu tavla do
.i mi ta'apli zoify. tu fy. do (.i mi pilno zoify. tu fy. lenu mi tavla do)

Without reference to addressing someone *as* something, I doubt there's much
difference between addressing and {tavla}. {donta'a}, at the most, to indicate
that talk is focussed somehow on the addressee. An alternative is something
like {tercmeta'a}: I both talk with someone, and name them. That would force
us to gate away with considering tu/vous as names, although in many contexts,
you do use titles to address (Japanese routinely uses names rather than
personal pronouns in the right honorific circumstances.) Come to think of
it, ta'artercme is better, because it gives a better place structure:
t1=c3 t2=c2 c1 t3 t4: speaker x1 addresses interlocutor x2 as x3, while
talking about x4 in language x5. Hey, that's not bad.

 %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%   %%%
non me tenent vincula, non me tenet clavis, %   (nsn@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au)
quaero mei similes et adjungor pravis.      % Nick Nicholas, CogSci victim,
      --- Archipoeta, _Confessio_.          % Univ. of Melbourne, Australia