On Thursday, June 12, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Jorge Llambías wrote:
--On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Alex Burka <aburka@seas.upenn.edu> wrote:Oh. I took that to mean {ta za'e gumri sa bergu} means {ta za'e bergu} but {ta za'e gumri sa ba'e bergu} means {ta ba'e bergu}. But in terms of erasure, presumably BAhE and the marked word are distinct for {si} as well, and for {su} of course it doesn't matter. So the definition should read "The two words are considered distinct for "si"/"sa" matching purposes."They are always distinct, also for bu, for zei, for zo. Does it have to be pointed out? Do we also point out that "lo broda"counts as two words, or that "ui nai" counts as two words, or that "pa mu" counts as two words?sa has different competing definitions, so I suppose the comment is for the one where "sa" looks at the selma'o of the following word.mu'o mi'e xorxes
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.