From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Feb 3 14:11:17 2000 X-Digest-Num: 353 Message-ID: <44114.353.1913.959273825@eGroups.com> Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 14:11:17 PST From: "Jorge Llambias" Subject: Re: re: 3 loaves X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 1913 la maikl cusku di'e >1. English "A (certain)..." = lebi'u Yes, I think that is what {bi'u} was invented for. >2. "another (=one more)": how about "za'u"? or "ny.su'ipa"? No, {za'u} is "more than one", or "more than x", but something like {za'u nanba} refers to each of those more than one loaves of bread, not to the more-than-one-th loaf that we want to talk about now, i.e. not the next one after all those we have talked about already. Same with n+1, with the additional complication that {nysu'ipa} by itself cannot be used as a quantifier. >3. so we can't negate ZA'O cmavo using "nabo"?? I was wrong about ZAhOnai, it is grammatical! I just checked with the Book. It used to be ungrammatical but it has been fixed. It is still the case however that {nai} is more restricted than UI. I don't understand how you mean to use {nabo}. co'o mi'e xorxes ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com