From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:45:41 2010
Reply-To: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Sun Dec 17 16:44:26 1995
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: RET: left factoring
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
Status: OR
X-From-Space-Date: Sun Dec 17 16:44:26 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
Message-ID: <o7_HQnn3vAM.A.YUF.Vu0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la paulos cusku di'e

> Let me change the structure: "The winds and sands of the beach". What
> does this give?
>
> 1. lei brife .e lei canre vu'o pe le xasyjimte to zoizy. OK for beach ? .zy.
> 2. lei brife ja lei canre pe le xasyjimte
> 3. lei brife ce lei canre pe le xasyjimte
> 4. ???

I suppose you meant {lei brife ja canre} and {lei brife ce canre}.

I would say that (1) is the best translation, or maybe it should
be {lei brife ku joi lei canre vu'o pe le xasyjimte}, depending
on whether you want to talk distributively of the winds and of the
sands, or of both as a whole. For example:

lei brife ku joi lei canre vu'o pe le xasyjimte cu daspo le ko'a se simlu
The winds and sands of the beach ruined her appearance.

In that case, the idea is that the winds and sands did the job together,
not that each of them did it on its own.

{lei brife ja canre} logically seems to work, too, but I don't find it
very appealing. Maybe it's just that we are not used to such things
in natlangs.

As for {lei brife ce canre}, I have no idea what it means.

Jorge