Message-Id: <9207221435.AA01101@relay1.UU.NET>
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:30:19 BST
Reply-To: CJ FINE <cbmvax!uunet!bradford.ac.uk!C.J.Fine>
Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!LOJBAN>
From: CJ FINE <cbmvax!uunet!bradford.ac.uk!C.J.Fine>
Subject:      Re: non-restrictive sumti?
To: John Cowan <cowan@snark.thyrsus.com>
In-Reply-To:  <no.id>; from "And Rosta" at Jul 21, 92 9:01 pm
Status: RO

>
>
> Is it possible in Ljb to distinguish restrictive and non-restrictive
> sumti?

	The general answer is to use "da noi" or "da no'u" for the
non-restrictive case. It is possible to use "dapoi" for the restrictive
case, but most often the simple sumti is better.

> E.g.     Excreting, whose x1 is an instance of an animal, is prevalent
>               on London streets.
	lonu danoi danlu ku vikmi kei cafne vi loi la londn. klaji

> v.       Excreting such that its x1 is a dog is prevalent on London
		streets.
	lonu lo gerku ku vikmi kei cafne vi loi la londn. klaji

>
> Or,
>          His love, which he felt only for Sophy, was ardent.
	(see below)

> v.       His love for Sophy was ardent.
	loka ko'a prami la sofis. kei carmi
>

Your other example gives some problems. The simple non-restrictive
equivalent is
	loka ko'a prami dano'u la sofis. kei carmi

	"His love for somebody, (incidentally that somebody is Sophy)
	was ardent".
but that is not what your English says. I think you have to do that
differently:
	loka ko'a prami da noi seni'i du la sofis. cu carmi


	co'omi'e kolin