On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 05:10:54PM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Invent Yourself wrote:
>
> > jaika provides us with an identity abstractor. {lo jaika ce'u xunre} is
> > one or more individual things that are red.
>
> It provides us with something, but not an identity abstraction. Where did
> we go wrong? I think that jaika = seka = poi'i, but I don't think anyof
> these offer an identity abstraction any more than le gerku or lo gerku
> offers the identity of the dog.
I don't understand jai ka.
I think, however, that either se/te/ve/xe ka or poi'i both provide
identity abstractors.
This doesn't mean you can say
mi djuno le seka gerku
for
I know who was the dog.
You'd have to say
mi djuno ledu'u makau du le seka gerku
or
mi djuno ledu'u makau gerku
or
mi djuno fi leseka gerku
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
pgp00014.pgp
Description: PGP signature