Received: from access2.digex.net by nfs1.digex.net with SMTP id AA15483 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:14:23 -0500 Received: by access2.digex.net id AA05843 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for lojbab); Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:14:19 -0500 From: Logical Language Group Message-Id: <199501032014.AA05843@access2.digex.net> Subject: Re: replies mainly re "ka" To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:14:17 -0500 (EST) Cc: lojbab@access.digex.net (Logical Language Group) In-Reply-To: <199412222024.AA10807@nfs2.digex.net> from "ucleaar" at Dec 22, 94 07:57:44 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 880 Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jan 3 15:14:29 1995 X-From-Space-Address: lojbab la .and. joi la xorxes. cusku be di'e casnu > > > (a) I used "dakau", not "makau". > > Is there any difference between them? The grammar papers say they are > > synonymous. > > I know a question-word can be followed by kau, and that goes into english > as an interrogative pronoun. But how what that work for "da kau"? Is it > just "da kau" that can get this interrogativoid interpretation,, or > does it apply to other non-Q words when followed by kau? Actually, any appropriate constituent can be marked by "kau". If it has a content, that means the answer to the indirect question is suggested (but not asserted) to be the referent. If it has no content of its own, e.g. "ma" or "da" or "zo'e" for sumti, then we have an indirect question with no pre- (or post-) supposition. -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.