Random remarks

I'm about ready to go through the Loglan-English dictionary from HERE, and essentially relex  most of it.  Since Ceqli is limited to 70 CV's, or grammar words (14 consonants x 5 full vowels), it just struck me that I can arrange for a very copious set to hold in reserve by the simple expedient of having five "shift key" CV's, thus.  the words va, ve, vi, vo, and vu operate as shifts.  "Si" is a grammar word, and so are siva, sive, sivi, sivo, and sivu.  Hence we have 65 regular CV's, plus 5x65 (325) potential grammar words in the shape CVvC, or 390 grammar words.

And, as you know, Ceqli stress falls on the first syllable, in morphemes and compound words. This leads to something annoying when the augmentive and diminutive gra and pyu are used in the manner of Esperanto -eg and -et.  We have:

dom - house
gradom - mansion

Esthetically, I somehow want the head root to be stressed.  Am I right, and if I am, would it be rational to redefine gra as "is a augmented version of" and pyu as "is a diminished version of," and consider them the head words:

domgra, pronounce DOMgra.

Or is there any real difference?  Like, what's the difference between "human giant" and "giant human"?

Or am I just blinded by the fact that such affixes are suffixes in European languages that I'm most familiar with?

Another thing.  I'm considering importing Loglan po, pu, and zo into Ceqli for use in the same manner.  Any good Loglanists/Lojbanists out there want to advise me on that?  Since I have the principle of terse Ceqli I originally thought that I should replace po with an abstracting suffix, but now I think that's a needless complication, and I can have:

To jino  The man
To po jino The state of being a man, manhood

And for terse Ceqli, when we want to dispense with articles, etc. we can let the po serve as is or oodge in to become a prefix of sorts.

Pojino zwar.  It's hard to be a man.

And the expanded, precise Ceqli would be

To po jino, da zwar.

This actually works better, and also makes it resemble the original Loglan more.

One more borrowing from Loglan:  I want all CV's to be able to take an -r to become predicates. This could even work with that po above.  po jino = porjino. Does that make sense?  Again, comment here or email me at rmay@mac.com

Dictionary revised thru F

At this point I've gone through and revised all my old Ceqli glossaries through the letter F, and the result is here
http://ceqli.pbworks.com/w/page/42067674/Ceqli-Glossary
Do check it out, and let me know if there are any mistakes, typos, logical errors, etc.  Either comment here, or email me at rmay@mac.com.  Any suggestions are welcome.

One oddity.  I was trying to make a word for afternoon.  Well, noon is diacen (day middle), and fu is after, so fudiacen should work.  However, fudia means tomorrow, so fudiacen could mean the middle of tomorrow, or just afternoon.  I copped out and borrowed a Mandarin word for afternoon.  Am I asking too much of fu (and do and pa)?

Dictionary questions

Gleki Arxokuna just pointed out to me that I wasn't being specific enough in the definitions I've been writing, so I've reverted to the old Loglan XYZ method.  Take a look at:  http://ceqli.pbworks.com/w/page/42067674/Ceqli-Glossary  I've revised up through banyo-tawl.  Now, my question is, am I overdoing it?  Does the predicate really need a second argument?  I have:

banyo-tawl

bath towel, X is a bath towel of person Y

And I'm thinking that including the Y argument is too arbitrary.  I notice that in the latest Loglan glossary from the Loglan site has a lot of nouns in the form:

bathroom,
   bancykru (1n) <bath room>[B-] B is a bathroom

So take a look at what I've revised so far, and let me know what you think.  Mimimal arguments or not?  I'm inclined to go with dropping the Y arguments in most of them.  Answer in the comments, or email me at rmay@mac.com.

Glossary progress

I've revised the glossary thru B.  It's Ceqli-English, but you can use search to look up by English.  It's at http://ceqli.pbworks.com/w/page/42067674/Ceqli-Glossary   Comments, corrections, criticisms, etc., welcome. Email me at rmay@mac.com

Working on the Glossary

I'm currently revising the glossary.  I'll post here when I'm done and it's up. The current one is very limited and it's HERE.

More on SA

I've added this to the Ceqli Wiki:

As for sa, it has as its basic function keeping two gravor from combining into a compound,

but it can also function, indirectly, as a sort of possessive particle.

Go ten sa dom.  The I-have house, or, the house that I have, or my house.

This can be abbreviated to.

Go sa dom.  My house.

This also works with any other pronoun, name, or noun:

Janzo ten sa dom > Janzo sa dom

To xyen ten sa dom > To xyen sa dom

So sa is not a possessive particle technically, but can function as though it were.

As for pronunciation, sa is meant to be unstressed.  I've been in the habit of writing

it without a space, gosa, to ensure that, but I've been talked out of it, for the sake

of consistency, so sa should always have a space before it.

Cause and Because and Therefore, etc.

I currently have zay to mean "cause," in the Esperanto "igi" sense.  Post HERE.  Definitely a verbish sort of word, derived loosely from the English -ize ending. And now I'm thinking of the word "because," and what it should be in Ceqli.  Seems like a related meaning, doesn't it?  Not a verb at all, though, but more of a conjunction, or maybe a preposition.  If it's a conjunction, it really should have the pyuvor CV shape. Right now, with zay, you can say:

Ke go komvol beke zay ke go kom beke.

That's in full logical Ceqli, the kind a computer can understand. That is:

The-fact-that I'm hungry causes the-fact-that I eat.  Or,
Because I'm hungry, I eat.

The 'ke' begins a phrase, the 'beke' ends it.  So the phrases can be arguments of the 'zay.'

You can also use the reversal particle 'be' to reverse the zay:

Ke go kom beke bezay ke go komvol beke.

The-fact-that I eat is-caused-by the-fact-that I'm hungry.

And in terse Ceqli, the kind you use when you talk to people instead of robots, you have:

Go komvol, zay go kom.

I'm hungry, so I eat.

Go kom, bezay go komvol.

I eat because I'm hungry.

That works, but I find the word zay a little clunky.  That is, when you're asking the why questions, it gets a little awkward.

Ka zay zi kom?  Why do you eat?  What causes you to eat?

You can also say it this way:

Zi kom bezay ka?  You eat because of what?

Or, making a compound word:

Kabezay zi kom?  Why do you eat?

That last feels clunky.  So I'm thinking of abandoning zay, because reversing it with the spelling method to get zya leaves you with a sound combination that's hard to say and likely to turn into /Za/ or something, and using this combo instead:

kaw - to cause, kwa to be caused by

Then you could say:

Kakwa zi kom?  Why do you eat?

Go kom kwa go komvol.  I eat because I'm hungry.

Then, of course, you can have this conversation.

Bum on street:  Go komvol.  I'm hungry.

Seriously, that would give me the word for because and the word for so, or therefore.

You:  Kakaw?   So what?

Reactions?