|
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.
|