coi mi'e danixel

I just joined and will probobly take a while to understand lojbanic ettiquette so please bear with me. I have been learning lojban for a while (I think about a year) and am intirested in learning more through actual human interaction. I am reletivly young (under drinking age) so please forgive me if my inexperiance or lack of knowlege renders me excessivly kenspeckled (conspicuous; easily seen or recognised).

I am currently reading through Robin Turner and Nick Nicolas' lojban for beginners and have stumbled upon a problem. I have just begun the section about cause and effect (note: I tend to read the matirial straight through several times rather than reading one lesson at a time.). Because I was not able to actually speak to anyone about lojban, and I enjoy comming up with scentances to satisfy the vocab. or grammar I am learning, I use a grammar checker ( http://www.lojban.org/jboski/index.php) ALOT.

Being perhaps overly eager I constructed a rediculously long scentance which my brain at this point refuses to translate back into coloquial english.

(was not gramatically correct) ..i le mi mamta pu cusku lu lenu do tavla mi semu'i lenu mi djica lenu do se catra mi zo'o li'u mi

I ran it throught the grammar checker and found that it was 'missing selbri at line 1 column 28'. I manipulated the scentance and found that removing an element (lenu) I assumed to be nessesary to the construction of the scentance let it pass through the checker with no gramatical warnings.

(Accepted version).i le mi mamta pu cusku lu do tavla mi semu'i lenu mi djica lenu do se catra mi zo'o li'u mi

Any explanations would be appreciated.

co'o

The first version of the sentence wasn't ungrammatical: you simply used a sumti where a bridi was expected to be. For example, consider this sentence: {lo sonci}. There is no bridi, either (just a bare sumti), and the parser will swear at it. When you wrote that your Mom told something, you had put a sumti instead of a bridi in her mouth. {do tavla mi} is a bridi, but {le nu do tavla mi [kei]} is a sumti.

If you wanted to express that an event motivated another event, you could use {mukti}. And why overburden with {se} conversions?