[lojban-beginners] Re: A problem with cu

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la iens cusku di'e

> coi rodo (or is simply {coi} better?)

Both are right.

> OK, but why do you use {cu} in the following sentence:
>
> {lenu mi cilre fi la lojban. cu xamgu mi}
>
> {xamgu} is a selbri, so you can use {cu}, but is
>
> {lenu mi cilre fi la lojban. xamgu mi}
>
> correct? {la lojban.} is a cmeme - there is no need for a {cu}?

It is correct but not what you want. {nu mi cilre fi la lojban}
is itself a selbri, which can form a tanru with {xamgu},
so you have {le (nu mi cilre fi la lojban) (xamgu)}.

> Another {cu}-problem:
>
> {la daucac. tcika lenu mi klama}
>
> is OK. If you want to use {se} it becomes something like
>
> {lenu mi klama cu se tcika la daucac.}
>
> Why is {se} not enough to separate {klama} and {tcika}?

Because you can have tanru of the form {broda se brode}.
{klama se tcika} is a tanru.

> mu'o mi'e .iens.gutsait. (or is mi'e ... enough? What is the
> difference?)

{mu'o} indicates that your transmission is over. {mi'e}
indicates who you are.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail