keflä ??

[KxanìaTaronyu]

I have recently decided to find a word for fail, and I have come up with a few theories. And although I know this will be a rather short thread, I thought I should just share this with you....

ke = not
flä = succeed

= Not succeed = Fail?

           OR


flä + NEW derivational change? = fail ? ?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now... Considering the second part, I think that it would be VERY important to have a derivational change, that changes a verb (?) to the opposite of what itself. And although it would be somewhat useless, we should still have it. <For words we do not have yet>

PLEASE POST YOUR ANSWERS/OPINIONS. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU 

Kìyevame!

- KxanìaTaronyu.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Fail is a pretty fundamental concept and so is unlikely to be a simple negation.

That said, for now, keflä would be the closest we have.

[hawnuyuna'viyä]

I see no reason as to why keflä would not be correct.
The language has been demonstrated to be highly logical, and since negation is a fundamental concept (so would be understood first), it would make sense for it to be prefixed to verbs to provide the opposites of their initially defined value.

[omängum fra'uti]

It is indeed the best we have now, but it is certainly not correct for the same reason we have zenke for must not instead of zenke.  The opposite of success, logically speaking, is a lack of success.  But that doesn't mean you failed, it just means you haven't succeeded yet.

I'm thinking fail would be its own root.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I see no reason as to why keflä would not be correct.
The language has been demonstrated to be highly logical, and since negation is a fundamental concept (so would be understood first), it would make sense for it to be prefixed to verbs to provide the opposites of their initially defined value.

sìltsan -> kawng
som -> wew

Fundamental concepts tend not to be negations, success and failure are pretty fundamental and, as Omängum says, lack of success is not the same as failure.

[hawnuyuna'viyä]

reason we have zenke for must not instead of zenke. 

Do you mean to say something differently here?

lack of success is not the same as failure.

Since when, all I can see there is two ways to state the same concept.
They are considered opposites, which puts them on the opposite ends of the same scale, so a lack of one is the existence of the other.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

As Omängum said, if I have yet to succeed I have not succeed yet I have not failed yet, I could succeed in the future or I could fail, as it is I am in a superposition of the two states so am I am neither one nor the other, hence "I haven't succeeded" =/= "I have failed".

[hawnuyuna'viyä]

I am in a superposition of the two states

Damn quantum. Gets everywhere nowadays!

Ok. I see the differences the time causes to this scale (can I have a 3 dimensional slidey scale?)

[wm.annis]

"Fail" is one of the words we have asked Frommer for in the LEP.