Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id XAA15422 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 23:28:09 +0200 Message-Id: <199512172128.XAA15422@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 685CA6A1 ; Sun, 17 Dec 1995 22:28:09 +0100 Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 16:26:26 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: RET: left factoring X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1064 Lines: 30 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