[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban-beginners] Re: A problem with cu




la iens cusku di'e

Thanks for your answers. If I would recognize {nu mi cilre fi
la lojban.} in {lenu mi cilre fi la lojban. cu xamgu mi} as a
selbri the {cu} in this sentence would be clear. Let's see what
I understand with my little knowledge about Lojban. If I don't
use {cu} {xamgu} would be x5 of {cilre}. Then the sentence doesn't
make any sense to me.

No, it's not that. {xamgu} is not a sumti, so it cannot fill
a sumti place. {xamgu} is a selbri. What you are missing is
that if you put two selbri words together, you get another
selbri. You need {cu} in {le broda cu brode} so that {broda}
and {brode} don't form a tanru. The same situation
occurs if you replace {broda} with {nu mi cilre fi la lojban}.

Now take:

{lenu mi cilre fi la lojban. (by a method x5) xamgu mi}

Just replace "(by a method x5)" with a good Lojban phrase. There
are no more places of {cilre}. Do I still need the {cu}?

Yes. The parser doesn't count arguments anyway, and it doesn't
take into account the meaning of the words. Whether or not
a sentence parses does not depend on the number of arguments
that the selbri takes.

Unfortunatly I don't understand the answers for my other {cu}-
problem with {lenu mi klama cu se tcika la daucac.} Probably
because I don't know what a tanru is (not yet!). Can I use the
following rule as long as I don't know it:

Use {cu se} instead of {se} when in doubt.

{se} never indicates the beginning of a selbri. {broda se brode}
is a selbri.

mu'o mi'e .iens. (Why is {mu'omi'e .iens.} correct, too?)

You can always write two cmavo together if you like. It makes
no difference to the grammar. The meaning doesn't change.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail