zozeizeizeizeifaho wrote: > The word form sounds a little strange (considering re'ei and re'au are > free), where is it from?
I have a hierarchy to how I think that cmavo space should be used up. Basically, any word of "non-experimental" (or, as I prefer to call it, "original CLL") form (which is to say .V, .VV, .V'V, CV, CVV, CV'V) should be reserved only for the most important, fundamental, and universally agreeable of proposed cmavo. The higher (a.k.a. "less prestigious") levels are increasingly long; polyphthongs (favoured the earlier that they come) are preferred over V'V'V strings and make a proposed cmavo "more prestigious" (which is to say "prime territory" for the better ideas).
So, how did I choose this word? Well, "re" follows the pattern of se, te, ve, xe. But that is already taken of course by re, which is rather tangentially related at best. But I wanted to maintain this parallel on some level, so I started the word with that syllable. I also wanted the word to end with "e" in order to clearly denote its belonging to "basic" SE. Next, I needed to figure out where this concept fit on the ladder of prestige within the then-available cmavo space. The idea is sort of basic, rather important for its triviality, but also not all that useful except in the new grammar that I had recently created (although it could find some use, perhaps slightly contrived, pathological, or explicit in all theretofore established grammar). Due to its triviality and lack of practical usage opportunities, the word lost a few points of prestige- it probably did not deserve the form CV'VV or CVV'V. I perhaps could have gone with CVV'VV, but that still felt a little to important for this idea and also disallowed the desired ending of "e" because CV'iV and CV'uV are not much loved for some reason. The basicness and cornerstone-ness (which is a positive spin on "triviality") of the word merited a bump up from the likes of CV'V'V'V. In my mind CV'V'V is not all that pretty and I would in fact prefer CV'VV'V (as more prestigious); you can also argue that it is not so basic or extrapolatory as to deserve a CV'V'V, which seems like an incredibly basic or derived design. So that pretty much left me with CVV'V'V, CV'VV'V, or CV'V'VV. You are right in that the current chosen structure could imply a derivation from a CV'VV word (perhaps re'au). I took the hit. To me, the form CV'VV'V was the most pleasing of the options aesthetically and in its nuances of importance, basicness, derivation, and general prestige; it just /fit/, you know? I chose the medial VV sequence to be "au" essentially arbitrary, I admit. I may have had se'au on the mind (in which case, maybe we can back-fit re'au to be compatible with both se'au and re'au'e somehow?); (by the way, se'au is also another reason for my distaste for making this word have shape CV'VV: it does not lend itself to pattern because of the already-existing word se'au, with which I am quite happy, even on an aesthetic level). In addition, I felt that the sequence "e'au'e" was more relaxing and easier on the eyes, ears, and mouth to utter/form/sense then any of the other available diphthong options that I had for the medial string; I did not want "ei" because that would be too repetitious, while "ai" was too sharp and "oi" too bloated and ugly; the contrast of "au" was euphonious and pleasing to me. So, there you have it, in all of its nasty detail and workings.
|