[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: na'e pu'i (Was: La Cucaracha)

Colin says:

> I don't think anybody has answered Jorge:
> +++++>
> John, you said nothing of my choice of {pu'i} over {ka'e} or {nu'o}.
> I'm not sure what {na'e pu'i} means: demonstrated inability?
> >++++++++
> I believe that
>         na'e pu'i broda
> means other-than-demonstrated-ability broda.

Actually, John did respond, and gave that answer. I'm happy that the
two answers agree. ;-)

> If it is true, as I believe,  that the following relations hold among
> the CAhA words:
> ca'a -> pu'i -> ke'a
> nu'o -> ke'a
> pu'i  =>^ nu'o
> nu'o => ^pu'i
> One might construe 'na'e pu'i' as meaning
> "a state for which a different term from pu'i would be
> more appropriate", and hence include 'ca'a' as a
> possibility. I think this would be perverse, and
> therefore suggest that
> na'e pu'i
> means the same as
> nu'o ja na'e ka'e
> 'has not and maybe cannot'
>         Colin

This seems reasonable, and then it is not what I want to use for
a cockroach who can't walk because it has lost two of its legs.

I guess {na'e ka'e} will have to do, and the {ca} should provide the
suggestion that it was able to walk in the past:

        ___le jalra ca na'e ka'e cadzu___

{ca'o} would be completely wrong here, if it really implies that the
event will cease in the future.

I could also say:

        ___le jalra ca ba'o ka'e cadzu___

and avoid negatives altogether. I think this is the one I like most.