GENERAL: barda, mutce, ricfu, carmi

[solpahi]

barda: x1 is big/large in property/dimension(s) x2 (ka) as compared with standard/norm x3.

mutce: x1 is much/extreme in property x2 (ka); x1 is very x2.

ricfu: x1 is rich/wealthy in goods/possessions/property/aspect x2.

carmi: x1 is intense/bright/saturated/brilliant in property (ka) x2 as received/measured by observer x3.

---

These words are all very similar, and I would like to better understand their differences. They may seem obviously different, but try explaining it in Lojban and you'll probably find it hard to keep them distinct.

barda seems to be about "size", but if any property can go in the x2 then it should not be limited to physical size. What is the difference between mutce lo ka melbi and barda lo ka melbi. Is the latter wrong? What, then, are valid barda2?

ricfu may seem different, but I opine that ricfu2 must be a property, and then it gets really hard to see the difference. ricfu lo ka crino and mutce lo ka crino differ how exactly? Does ricfu lo ka ponse ma kau mean "wealthy", or is ricfu lo ka ponse so'i da better? (there is a difference.)

carmi says in the definition and in the notes that it is somehow related to light. But carmi2 again is any property. Do carmi lo ka blabi and mutce lo ka blabi differ only in that carmi3 says it is mutce ga'a lo te carmi? This, to me, would seem like too little a difference. Or is carmi2 somehow restricted in some other way? The synonyms listed in carmi's notes ("lustrous, gleaming, sparkling, shining (all probably better metaphorically combined with gusni: gusycai or camgu'i); in colors, refers principally to increased saturation (with opposite kandi).") are all wonderful and useful, but I don't understand how to access them. What is really the underlying meaning here, and how does it differ from the other gismu under discussion?

These are difficult questions and it may take a while to find satisfying answers.

[lynn]

I’ve always considered carmi to be related to senses — hence the x₃. I’ve probably described sounds, tastes, or feelings as carmi: saturated, intense, overwhelming the senses.

I dunno about the others. I feel like ricfu₂ is specifically something valuable to ricfu₁. Like, ko'a ricfu lo ka broda means ko'a mutce lo ka broda ku noi se vamji fi ko'a. And I’d never use barda₂, but this is all just my personal experience.

[uakci]

My view on it is that barda is relative (set in contrast to a norm), mutce is objective, carmi is perceptive (observed) and ricfu has a connotation of na'e claxu,

[mklcp]

Common, it's here where (ka) places are useful!
My view is that barda, carmi, ricfu and carmi are all related, indeed, to a same notion: a thing which is, as mutce says, very,, as carmi says, intense ⦅to retake vague english words⦆.
So, in specifying big, wealthy, brilliant,, I think that barda, ricfu and carmi already precise the (ka) place of mutce.

• barda pertains to length, physical space
• rifcu pertains to a proportion ("wealthy"), but also to possession ("possess", "good")
• carmi pertains to a density (not necessarily physical, with 'quantity/(m^n)' as unit), but also to ligth ("brilliant", even if this word has a lot of metaphorical connotations in english).

I would so advise to keep only mutce, and generate the other with lujvo. Examples:

• cimde mutce or linsi mutce for barda
• ponse mutce or klani marji mutce for ricfu
• denmi mutce or gusni mutce for carmi

Related gismu which might be changed with those one:

• kandi seems to be the milxe of carmi ⦅milxe as a midpoint of mutce⦆
• pindi is related to ricfu, with a semantic of claxu
• midju is related to milxe, obviously. Due to its geometrical meaning, it can be made from linsi lanxe mokca ⦅"the point where distances are in equilibre"⦆
• nutli is very strange ⦅i would say polysemous⦆: it has both "not towards any extreme on scale", and "not taking side": I would say that the latter can be made by jinri claxu, which would leaves the former,, but this former is very near of milxe and midju

Mainly, the choice is to accept the process of lujvo-making, not necessarily these lujvo,, and assure to have yet the "sub-semantic" for the possibly deleted gismu ⦅e.g. 'goods' for 'ricfu'⦆

[Ntsekees]

I tend to see {ricfu} as {x1 ckini so'i da x2}, which is handy for making lujvo such as {po'ecfu} (x1 ponse so'i da), {juncfu} (x1 djuno so'i da), {fricfu} (x1 lifri (be ba'o ku) so'i da), zukcfu and so on.