Date:  Thu, 16 Oct 1997 14:34:26 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199710161934.OAA12453@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: tremau
To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 935
Lines: 23

Xorxe:
> There are two different
> definitions of {le ni broda}: one is {le jaila'u broda} and the other
> is {le ka broda la'u makau}. We just have to choose which one
> is correct. Usage favours the second one, the theoretical definitions
> favour the first. (All those ni/ka places in the gismu list require the
> second, the raised modality.)

1. Why {le ka broda la`u makau} (assuming no ce`u there) and not
   {le du`u broda la`u makau}?
2. If {ni} was "clarified" to Option 2, could {jei} be redefined
   as "whether"? At the moment {jei} is parallel to option 1,
   but Option 2 seems usefuller.

3. Are ni and ka redundant, strictly speaking? Given du`u and nu
   and ce`u, is there anything that they can't do but ni and ka
   can?

BTW, I have been finding it helpful when Jorge & Kris give
pithy summaries of the conclusions-so-far, since I have been
keeping only half an eye on this thread.

--And.