From blindbravado@gmail.com Sat Feb 13 07:33:30 2010 Received: from mail-ew0-f223.google.com ([209.85.219.223]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NgJzl-00046a-9D for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 07:33:29 -0800 Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so154965ewy.4 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 07:33:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=k8gkN5rX29q6PtQ3RkPiIA9gMF7X7SjAxpTSmfMw7hw=; b=a3eUZfUqY7RPkhX7x7qh6iUrupNaQ5C914lYRRovp+FavWzsH0wN2ougxcqc4XrNdB jSXtLoFHk/dfr3BNqcezFQIa6U5bJlxq1oMuR7aMXq6uqb07SU1E4v+gkR+2dIOENiWH 8nRSO3PXI01LwLwdlyrF8EJUCu0/G4N5JgeBM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ISDO+yJDLpLX8umVMFPOzzr/QpW8wSkpnp2x4bPc8xy0b9woWLzvWkqYR/SAE5HzsN +rNyG6J+dY9S5c4I8cOkSQt5y9BdpU+GanFmyjbUzsTGSv7dBBAQQLAuTUFyCQUp/T2T vU78OAStJF/Z+35pXUonA2uPdN0Xij0M8lOp4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.109.151 with SMTP id j23mr1133838ebp.48.1266075194190; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 07:33:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <201002130154.07125.phma@phma.optus.nu> References: <1f1080831002122116g3aa31265n5546866fc2a2e48e@mail.gmail.com> <201002130154.07125.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:33:14 -0500 Message-ID: <1f1080831002130733s25f1f959nbcb9f583283cf3c3@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: la orestis...grammar question From: Ian Johnson To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0ce043f8356d1e047f7d1abd --000e0ce043f8356d1e047f7d1abd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ki'e.ui Thank you for reminding me about {be} in particular; I think that's probabl= y a better way to do it, since {mamta} and {patfu} are structured that way anyway. In retrospect I'd go so far as to say that a possessive constructio= n here (except perhaps with po'e) is a little {malglico}. mu'omi'e latros. On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Saturday 13 February 2010 00:16:48 Ian Johnson wrote: > > Simple enough: is this grammatically correct, or am I missing something= ? > > > > Note: Orestiad spoilers. > > > > la .orestis. catra le vo'a mamta mu'i lonu vo'e catra le vo'a patfu > > > > I mainly ask because I'm incorporating a pretty good number of things > here, > > so it seems like there's a fair chance something could go wrong. Also, > > might this be a case where {lenu} is appropriate even under (is under t= he > > right word?) xorlo, since the event is a particular event in the text? > > According to both jbofi'e and camxes, it is grammatical, and according to > my > reading, it means what you intend. {lenu} is appropriate. You could also > say > {le mamta be vo'a} and {le patfu be vo'a}, which mean unambiguously the > people who gave birth to and/or raised Orestes, rather than the parents o= f > someone else whom he was assigned to kill in battle, for instance. > > Pierre > > -- > When a barnacle settles down, its brain disintegrates. > J=E1 n=E3o percebe nada, j=E1 n=E3o percebe nada. > > > > --000e0ce043f8356d1e047f7d1abd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ki'e.ui

Thank you for reminding me about {be} in particular; I t= hink that's probably a better way to do it, since {mamta} and {patfu} a= re structured that way anyway. In retrospect I'd go so far as to say th= at a possessive construction here (except perhaps with po'e) is a littl= e {malglico}.

mu'omi'e latros.

On Sat, Feb = 13, 2010 at 1:54 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
On Saturday 13 February 2010 00:16:48 Ian= Johnson wrote:
> Simple enough: is this grammatically correct, or am I missing somethin= g?
>
> Note: Orestiad spoilers.
>
> la .orestis. catra le vo'a mamta mu'i lonu vo'e catra le v= o'a patfu
>
> I mainly ask because I'm incorporating a pretty good number of thi= ngs here,
> so it seems like there's a fair chance something could go wrong. A= lso,
> might this be a case where {lenu} is appropriate even under (is under = the
> right word?) xorlo, since the event is a particular event in the text?=

According to both jbofi'e and camxes, it is grammatical, an= d according to my
reading, it means what you intend. {lenu} is appropriate. You could also sa= y
{le mamta be vo'a} and {le patfu be vo'a}, which mean unambiguously= the
people who gave birth to and/or raised Orestes, rather than the parents of<= br> someone else whom he was assigned to kill in battle, for instance.

Pierre

--
When a barnacle settles down, its brain disintegrates.
J=E1 n=E3o percebe nada, j=E1 n=E3o percebe nada.




--000e0ce043f8356d1e047f7d1abd--