From cbmvax!uunet!cuvmb.bitnet!LOJBAN Fri Aug 21 13:22:24 1992
Return-Path: <cbmvax!uunet!cuvmb.bitnet!LOJBAN>
Date: Fri Aug 21 13:22:24 1992
Message-Id: <9208210910.AA07078@relay1.UU.NET>
Reply-To: cbmvax!uunet!oasis.icl.co.uk!I.Alexander.bra0122
Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!pucc.princeton.edu!LOJBAN>
From: cbmvax!uunet!oasis.icl.co.uk!I.Alexander.bra0122
Subject:      bytyky.
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@snark.thyrsus.com>
Status: RO

bytyky. zo'u

>ni'o ca le lampru nalgundje le me bytyky. ritnacterjivna cu cfari

{ritkemnacterjvi} - or is that too fussy?

> >.i la'edi'u se jalge lenu la byrnlis. cmima ba'o le vomoi terfendi co'a le
> >  cimoi terfendi gi'e pujecajeba rinka lenu mi mutce gleki
(Nick:)
> You're trying to abbreviate {ba'o cmima le vomoi gi'e co'a cmima le cimoi};
> I don't think the form you've used works, but I can suggest no better.

I think a termset does the trick (the ZAhO definitely refer
to {cmima})

        la BYrnlis. cmima nu'i ba'oku le vomoi terfendi nu'u.e
        co'aku le cimoi terfendi

BTW, I think you need a {kei} before the {gi'e}.

> >  le kelgri poi se cmene zo su'onzis. zi'e noi natmrkymri

Nick> Is it the case that le'avla can't have {y}? If so, then natmrkmri (yum :)

I *do* hope this works :)  I think you're right about {y}.  I asked
Colin what was _phonologically_ wrong with his {*bradfrd.}, but
he hasn't replied yet.  But the rules for _le'avla_ will be
different anyway.  I suspect they unfortunately rule out both of these.

> .i lenu la byrnlis. joi la su'onzis. cu me bytyky. simjvi kei pu mentu sono
>   gi'e pluka ni ki'unai lenu mi pu cilmo le carvi

{mentu li sono gi'e pluka mi}

> .i .ui la byrnlis. poroi kelsnada gi'e la su'onzis. noroi kelsnada

Another {gi'e} -> {.ije}

> .i seja'e la'edi'u la byrnlis. jinga gi'e mi mi gleki xruti lemi zdani

I quite like this "reflexive" {mi mi [] xruti}.

Iain.