Wuzzy wrote:
> durka42 wrote:
> > Hmm. So "blind" (unable to see) is narviska'e but "invisible"
(unable
> to
> > be seen) is selvisnalka'e. This seems undesirably asymmetric to me.
>
>
> I am not really happy with the definition of selvisnalka'e. I always
> understood “kakne” to mean something along the lines of “innately
> capable”. So a capability like “to be seen” is not really a
> capability at all, it’s completely passive. Maybe I should find a
better
> word for “x1 is invisible for x2 under conditions x3” so
> “selvisnalka'e” can be “deprecated”.
>
> Also: “nar” (na) vs “nal” (na'e).


It should be "ko'a na jai cumki fai lo ka se viska"

which results in selvisnarjaxycu'i.

Not sure it's worth it.

Comment #4: Re: invisible

Alex Burka (Mon Nov 24 20:41:53 2014)

gleki wrote: > Wuzzy wrote: > > durka42 wrote: > > > Hmm. So "blind" (unable to see) is narviska'e but "invisible" > (unable > > to > > > be seen) is selvisnalka'e. This seems undesirably asymmetric to me. > > > > > > I am not really happy with the definition of selvisnalka'e. I always > > understood “kakne” to mean something along the lines of “innately > > capable”. So a capability like “to be seen” is not really a > > capability at all, it’s completely passive. Maybe I should find a > better > > word for “x1 is invisible for x2 under conditions x3” so > > “selvisnalka'e” can be “deprecated”. > > > > Also: “nar” (na) vs “nal” (na'e). > > > It should be "ko'a na jai cumki fai lo ka se viska" > > which results in selvisnarjaxycu'i. > > Not sure it's worth it. selvisnarcu'i seems good. But I might go with visnarka'e instead of narviska'e, again for symmetry. But that's minor.