Re: [jboske] RE: lo'ie != lo'ei

[John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>]

Bob LeChevalier scripsit:

> "I need a box"
> is
> "mi nitcu lo nu da/lo tanxe tanxe zo'e"

I suppose this should be "tanxe cu tanxe", as I don't know what a boxish
box is, unless indeed it means "prototypical box".

Assuming the former interpretation, then this won't work. The mere
fact that a box is boxing (up) something is not what I need when I need
a box, although the "zo'e" may be twisted to save you, on the interpretation
"I need for something-unspecified to be boxed by a box", which is not
quite the same as "I need a box". After all, you might need it as a
source of pulp for paper-making.

No, the x2 of nitcu is an intentional context, just like the x2 of sisku,
and the same fix should be applied: switch to "x1 needs something that
has the property x2". After all, you can need a cure for Ebola even though
there isn't one, which is exactly parallel with "Galadriel seeks a unicorn."

> Feel free to add/replace ce'u if applicable.

"ce'u" doesn't make sense in "nu" abstractions.

-- 
"May the hair on your toes never fall out!" John Cowan
--Thorin Oakenshield (to Bilbo) jcowan@reutershealth.com