From jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:44:53 2010
Date:         Sat, 20 May 1995 14:21:43 EDT
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: TEXT: le gunse ku joi le lorxu
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
X-From-Space-Date: Sat May 20 14:17:39 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Message-ID: <Xbpz0IJZTBF.A.dhE.lt0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

>  > > How does {co'a spoja fa lei betfu ba le lorpanzi} stack up?
>                                        ^^ should be {be}
>  >
>  > The mass of stomacks of the fox cub(s) begins to explode. = All the
>  > stomachs there are in one or more cubs I think about begin to explode,
>  > together.
>
> I don't think that's quite right.  Because of the {le lorpanzi}, each
> of the referents of {lei betfu be le lorpanzi} is a mass of stomachs,
> each belonging to just one fox cub.  (Naturally, each mass of stomachs
> will have only one stomach.)  So this means just the same thing as
> {co'a spoja fa le betfu be le lorpanzi}.  I think.

That's why I used {lei betfu be lei lorpanzi} in the translation.

> Um.  Well, Jorge is of the opinion that {e'u do} is exactly equivalent
> to {ko}.

I wouldn't say exactly equivalent, but they both would be in the
imperative mood.  {e'u do} is more precise, because it says what type of
imperative it is:  a suggestion.  Other possibilities would be {e'o do}
for a request, {ei do} for a command.

Jorge