From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Thu Jan 13 13:38:31 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:38:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from web41907.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.158])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CpCfn-0007zb-LP
	for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:38:31 -0800
Received: (qmail 26033 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Jan 2005 21:38:01 -0000
Message-ID: <20050113213801.26031.qmail@web41907.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41907.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:38:01 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:38:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: la umpti.dumptis.
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
In-Reply-To: <41E6E3DA.8030106@happyvalley.eclipse.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-archive-position: 1008
X-Approved-By: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
X-list: lojban-beginners


--- Jon Reeves wrote:
> >>la umpti.dumptis. zutse lo bitmu

That should be {la .umptidumptis.} or {la .umptis.dumptis.}
or something like that. {.umpti} by itself could eventually
be a fu'ivla, but then it can't be joined with a cmevla
to make a cmene. 

> >>i. la umpti.dumptis. barda farlu
> Seems that the difference is that clani is more about a measured dimension of
> a physical object, whereas barda is more about describing things (not
> necessarily objects - 'property/dimension(s)' )that are relatively large, so
> i think perhaps barda is the better choice for this?

Another possibility is {ve'u farlu}.

> 
> >>i. ro loi xirma je prenu pe le nolraitru 
> >ro xirma .e ro prenu zi'e po le nolraitru
> 
> I didnt realise ro could be used without a lo, makes sense though - is the lo
> assumed to be present but ellided?

They're equivalent, yes.

> Not sure about the zi'e ? "joins relative clauses which apply to the same
> sumti" ?

I think he meant {vu'o}, sort of the reverse of {zi'e}.

> Also, I thought the loi should be included to indicate that it is the mass of
> men and horses that are incapable of putting him together again, rather than
> each of them individually being unable to do so
> 
> maybe -
> 
> loi ro xirma .e ro prenu poi po le nolraitru

You'd need {lu'o} if you want the people included as well.
{loi} will only take the horses.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail