zipcpi: zo i'au ki'a? FAQ about the new cmavo, i'au
- zo i'au ki'a? (What does i'au mean?)
It is a context-free way of attaching attitudinals or other UI-cmavo to entire sentences or statements as an afterthought. e.g. do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu i'au ui
- I don't see why this is necessary. Can't I just use .i or vau?
vau isn't sufficient, especially not in the example sentence I just gave. Note that there is more than one bridi-tail left open (three, in fact), thus to actually attach to the entire sentence you require do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu vau vau vau ui, which just sounds wrong.
- But wait, you just used it in a sentence where vau does work!
My motivation for inventing i'au is to avoid any necessary consideration for grammatical context or remaining famyma'o when attaching afterthought attitudinals (i'au a'inai). It could even work where vau won't be grammatical, e.g. coi lo tavla pe la .lojban. i'au ui, in which case you won't have to think "Hm, no I can't use vau because this sentence doesn't have a bridi. So what famyma'o do I need to use... oh yeah, do'u" (oi)
.i is often used as a solution but isn't ideal, as the connection is less straightforward, and in order to avoid the UI-cmavo applying to the next sentence you then need another .i. This becomes more obvious for UI-cmavo that imply more than just emotion, substantially changing the meaning of whatever it is attached to, like pe'a, xo'o or xu. For example:
do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu i'au xu = xu do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu "Is it true that you helped me become richer?" / "Did you help me become richer?" - parallels certain languages like Chinese where "true/false" is added as an afterthought.
Compare the following alternatives (note: pathological translations):
do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu xu "You helped me increase in something-ness, but is that "rich"?"
do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu vau xu "You helped me increase in something, but is that "richness"?"
do sidju mi lo nu mi zenba lo ni ricfu .i xu [co'e] "You helped me become rich. (Something) true or false?" - technically makes the first sentence a statement rather a question, leaves the true/false question up to context, and if you want to add another sentence after that another .i must be used.