2004-08-24 kl. 02.26 skrev Rex May:

> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 22:59:44 +0100, Matthew Barnett
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> In message &lt;[log in to unmask]&gt; you wrote:
>> &gt; I'm puzzling over a set of compounds and I'm afraid I may be
> importing
>> &gt; English peculiarities into Ceqli.
>> &gt;
>> &gt; val - worth, worthy
>> &gt; fey - can, able to
>> &gt; tan - tends to
>> &gt; bon - good
>> &gt;
>> &gt; Now, "kom" means 'eat', and "ciba" means 'this'
>> &gt;
>> &gt; Ciba komval - this is worth eating
>> &gt; Ciba kombon - this is good to eat
>> &gt;
>> &gt; Both of which describe something that is being eaten
>> &gt;
>> Could it be argued that 'kom' acting a bit like an adverb?
> Yes, indeed.
Isn't it just a predicative: (the) eating of food is good. "*food
eating is good." ? In klepto you can imagine phrases like: 'Eating is
good." When I try to translate it into Klepto I find that "the eating
of food" is not necessary, it is redundant. We generally eat food. On
the other hand a phraze like "The eating of shoes is good." In Klepto:
"Shuimandukation e bon.".

>>   Ciba val - This is worthy; this has worth.
>>    Ciba komval - This is worth eating; this has eat-worth.
In Espeeranto you wuld have "Tio estas manghinda". But you could
imagine "is worth" as a verb: *worths". *"This worths eating." Or
perhaps somewhat better: "This merits eating". In Klepto "To
val-manduka." (The morpheme "val-" is stolen from Cegli. :-)
>> Or, to put it another way:
>>    This has worth. What kind of worth? Eat-worth.
To ha valor. To ha manduki valor.
>>    This is worthy. What kind of worthy? Eatly worthy. (Yuck!)
> And here we get to the crux of things.  Ceqli has two aspects  logical
> and concise.   Most usages will be in between somewhere, but logical
> Ceqli is Loglan-like.  Unambiguous and totally clear.  Concise Ceqli is
> Mandarin-like.  Or like 'headline' English.
> So, the compound expression
> Ciba bepyarfey.   This is loveable.  (pyar-love) This is capable of
> being
> loved.   In extended, logical Ceqli you could say:
> Ciba fey ke bepyar.   This is able that passive love.  or  This is
> able to
> be loved.
> But one's first reaction with 'val' is to say:
> Ciba pyarval.  This is loveworthy
Or This has love-worth. > This has lovevalue.
> on the English model.  But the 'val' does not necessarily call for the
> subject to be the object of the other element of the compound.

But also: To vala amor. To vala mandukar. or like a noun: To vala
mandukation. Or: To e mandukationvali. An adjective after e (is) will
be a predicative. Cib e mandukvali.

If I am not mistaken there are languages that can form nearly
everything lika a nominal phraze, like "He is doing foot-intake. She is
making an arrival. They are committing letter-writing. etc. Basically
it is only the conventions of English that forbid us to make such
sentences, but if there were a language with higher status that all
modern novels were translated into English from, then quite soon this
would become an accepted way of expressing oneself.

I would not be surprised if science could show that if lots of
translations are made from a certain language haveing a higher status
than the target language, then certain forms in the target langauge
will be affected.
> Ciba val pel.  This is worthy to fight.  This is worthy to do some
> fighting.
Cib vale gerra. Cib e gerra-vali.

Cib vale guerra.
Cib vale pekun.
(Food is worth (worths) money.

I hope these poor examples in Kelpto will help spreading some light.

Kjell R