Re: xi, kennings, jvajvo

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

Lojbab:
> >My solution: is it possible ofr a brivla to have a {xi}
> >"subscript"? The subscript could indicate that the brivla comes from
> >a nonstandard lexicon. Then even if {jamnyfagri xi la standard}
> >means "napalm", {jamnyfagri xi la kenning} could mean "sword".
> >Perhaps there is some way of toggling the whole text so the
> >hearer looks the word up in the kenning list first and only
> >consults the standard lexicon if the word isn't in the kenning
> >list. Maybe {ni`o xi la kenning} might do that.
>
> pe'a is supposed to do that.  But subscripting brivla or ni'o could also
> work (though there is a competing convention that NIhO with sibscripts is
> usable to switch between space-time-reference sets).
>
> When you use pe'a, all the semantic rules are more or less thrown out.
> Or some of them, or none of them.  No way was built in to specify
> alternate conventions.  But we did envision the need to do so.  I suggest
> se'i metalinguistic statement, perhaps before the title evem  Indeed I
> am sure that is what Athelstan and I talked about since he and I devised the n
> needs for and usages of se'i.

It's {sei} rather than {sei}, isn't it? [Said from memory.]
Anyway, it's a good suggestion, which could be borne in mind
for similar needs. For example, cmene are by default designations
chosen by the speaker - "that which I choose to call X" - so if
one wishes to make it clear that one is using a conventional
rather than an ad hoc name, then {sei} could be the means.

--And