From jjllambias@xxxxxxx.xxxx Sun Nov 28 09:08:54 1999
X-Digest-Num: 296
Message-ID: <44114.296.1604.959273825@eGroups.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 09:08:54 PST
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@xxxxxxx.xxxx
Subject: Re: "What I have for dinner depends on what there is in the fridge"


> What I have for dinner depends on what there is in the fridge.

le nu mi citka roda poi mi citka ke'a cu jalge
le nu rode poi ke'a nenri le lekmi'i cu nenri le lekmi'i
"My eating that which I eat is a result of
that which is in the fridge being in the fridge".

I think this may point to a general explication of {kau},
although in the general case the quantification
should be outside. It doesn't seem to make a lot of
difference in this case:

roda poi mi citka ke'a ro de poi ke'a nenri le lekmi'i
zo'u le nu mi citka da cu jalge le nu de nenri le lekmi'i


It seems to work for other indirect questions as well:

la djan djuno le du'u makau klama
John knows who came.

ro da poi ke'a klama zo'u la djan djuno le du'u da klama
For each x that came, John knows that x came.

co'o mi'e xorxes