From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Sat Nov 26 15:45:05 1994
Message-Id: <199411262045.AA15010@nfs2.digex.net>
Date: Sat Nov 26 15:45:05 1994
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>
Subject:      Re: Cowan's sum#3 any..
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Sun, 20 Nov 94 17:04:05 EST.)
Status: RO

Djer & Xorxes discuss:
> I want (any) sandwich would be
>
> mi djica pa lo su'o re snuji   or
>
> mi djica xe'e lo snuji, vs. djan's (with others),
>
> mi djica tu'a lo snuji sa'e

I suggest:
  mi djica lo siho mi citka lo snuji
or, more tersely & more vaguely (though surely not too vague for the
context):
  mi djica lo siho snuji
or, even more tersely:
  mi djica le snuji
where "le snuji" refers to an idea about me eating a sandwich. (This
works only if LE is -veridical.)

But, since I expect that out of laziness people would say
"mi djica lo siho mi citka lo snuji" even when they mean "There
is a sandwich that I want" (instead of "Da poi snuji zohu mi
djica lo siho mi citka da"), I think there should be an explicit
marker showing whether the lo-sumti in a subordinate bridi can
be put before the zohu - i.e. markers for +/-"exportable".

---
And