Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 14:19:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from manyas.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr ([139.179.30.24]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AcVq-0006jU-00 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 14:19:43 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by manyas.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2840932201 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:19:06 +0300 (EEST) Received: from bilkent.edu.tr (ppp103.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr [139.179.111.103]) by manyas.bcc.bilkent.edu.tr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 662F1287C2 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:19:04 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <3EAF4FB0.2010904@bilkent.edu.tr> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:23:12 -0400 From: "robin.bcc" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030313 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: poi or noi? References: <5391625$10516320443eaea1acac6e01.61878907@config9.schlund.de> In-Reply-To: <5391625$10516320443eaea1acac6e01.61878907@config9.schlund.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 X-archive-position: 277 X-Approved-By: robin@bilkent.edu.tr X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: robin@bilkent.edu.tr Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 1351 Jens Gutzeit wrote: > coi rodo > > In "Lojban for Beginners" (chapter 9/ke'a), you can find the > exercise to form some relative clauses: > > {mi kakne lenu citka loi cidjrkari .i lenu citka loi cidjrkari > cu nandu} becomes {mi kakne lenu citka loi cidjrkari kei poi > (ke'a) nandu} > > As far as I understand this sentence it is a non-restrictive > relative clause, since being difficult is just an additional > information. But then you have to use {noi} instead of {poi}. > Am I wrong? Was {poi} used instead of {noi}, because {noi} > is introduced later? Erk. I'll assume it was one of Nick's examples rather than mine, since I don't remember writing it, but as far as I can see, in this context there is no essential difference between noi and poi. I think if you translate it into English, it doesn't make much difference whether there is a comma after the "which". > > By the way, the best translation for "Thanks in advance" I can > manage is {mi ckire do lenu ba danfu le mi preti}. I know {ki'e}, > but how do I translate the "in advance"? I think you just did with the "ba". You're saying "I thank you for the future event". robin.tr -- "A Perl script is "correct" if it gets the job done before your boss fires you." - Larry Wall Robin Turner IDMYO Bilkent Univeritesi Ankara 06533 Turkey www.bilkent.edu.tr/~robin