Re: backchannels

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

And:
> So far I'm happiest with {.a'a}. Ije loi dahi nu koa mi se bacru kei
> mi se xarkae.

i pe'i xamgu fa le nu ka'e cuxna fi le so'imei  i le nu cusku lu
a'a... ie... ie go'i... a'a... je'e... a'a ie... li'u cu zmadu lu
a'a... a'a... a'a... a'a... a'a... li'u le ka cinri


lojbab:
> > fi'i      COI      hospitality
> > vocative: hospitality - inhospitality; you are welcome/ make yourself at
> >home
>
> fi'i was indeed put into the language to serve as one possible answer to
> "thank you", though simple acknowledgement should also be fine.  But we
> also saw fi'i as serving for welcoming and invitation to an arrving guest
> in which case the fi'i might come before the ki'e.

If it wasn't for English, I wouldn't see any connection between welcoming
someone and responding to a "thank you". Answering "bienvenido" to
"gracias" in Spanish sounds ridiculous. Other idioms, like "don't mention
it" or "my pleasure", can be translated and do make some sense, even though
they are not common expressions to say in that context, but "you're
welcome" doesn't.

A literal translation of the usual response in Spanish, "de nada", would
be something like {nalselki'u}, but I don't think that's very good for
Lojban either. The Esperanto response, "nedankinde", would be perhaps
{na'e kirjerna}.

I would prefer something purely Lojbanic for Lojban. I don't like
having the same idiom of English, which at least to me doesn't seem
to make much sense. {je'e} is at least original, even if too laconic
for my taste.

Jorge