DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;        b=lXfsRJ3KooWaZTd7euYsDMQZoBHhHkmGJD611rbmc+Y0WUa6oe/AyQqjBs+H5JahHq         PRyl91MYFjKvIGuZ5M5rimF6WO5a8aamh7J/2snuA8QKQoMYUqMniEaVi+2Ux9rs3oqh         Im3HTLMs292GM1Pez+e9IXip14nqWd8geSEr0=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4de8c3930910050749y39643394h182172cd290b3e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7f1d42860910021120n1033c6a3wbef9131c23f2c9a0@mail.gmail.com>	 <27513e550910022003g4c4bb780s8c36f55c805feba0@mail.gmail.com>	 <96f789a60910050447q7f476f89mda57aa07f9ac1607@mail.gmail.com>	 <27513e550910050545v53b8bcd4x6631ee8ead7c3d72@mail.gmail.com>	 <4de8c3930910050749y39643394h182172cd290b3e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 12:27:27 -0300
Message-ID: <925d17560910050827vfff00d5q4dab697a6eaf6d7f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: using 'se' in conversation
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Length: 1608

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:49 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think we should be able to add a descriptor to the pro-sumti in that case:
>
>  .i lo poi mi na nelci ku'o da [cu] pu noroi se viska

Currently grammatical options are:

 .i lo poi mi na nelci ku'o su'o da [cu] pu noroi se viska
 .i lo poi mi na nelci ku'o me da [cu] pu noroi se viska
 .i lo poi mi na nelci ku'o co'e [cu] pu noroi se viska

> (It's closer to the Chinese with "mi" before "nelci".) The current
> parsers won't validate it. But, if i remember right, i saw xorxes
> suggesting a form to that effect.

I might have, but I don't remember. One cmavo that has been proposed
by someone else is "poi'i", in selma'o NU:

 .i lo poi'i mi na nelci cu pu noroi se viska

but that has a slightly different structure.

> If we are to seek more linguistic
> neutrality & versatility in Lojban, we want the combination of
> 'descriptor + pro-sumti' officially acknowledged (supposing it has not
> yet been).

It is grammatical only with a quantifier present: "LE quantifier KOhA"
(More generally, "LE quantifier sumti".)


>  And this is
> one thing which other major conlangs such as Esperanto cannot imitate;
> you cannot change the order of nouns in "rato de kato"
> (right-branching), unless some clitic like the one in English is
> invented:
>
>  the cat's rat

You sometimes find things like "la de la lingvonormiga institucio
aplikitajn kriteriojn", "la de la homoj kaŭzita klimatŝanĝo", "la de
la federala registaro Centro por la Avanco de Lingvolernado" in
Esperanto, but it is not a common form.

mu'o mi'e xorxes