[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[jbovlaste] Re: fu'ivla for liquors



2010/11/23 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> {uiski} is not a valid lujvo because *-ui- doesn't have rafsi form. So {uiski} is in fact a well-formed type 4 fu'ivla.
>>
>> The first sentence there is true, obviously. The fu'ivla appears to
>> nonetheless fail a sort of backwards slinku'i test, in that ".uiski
>> kabri" falls apart into ".ui skikabri," and "skikabri" is a valid
>> lujvo.
>
> "uiski kabri" is not "ui skikabri" just like "daski kabri" is not "da skikabri".

<snip explanation>

Um, yes. This.

Looks like the major brain fart that set me driving exactly the wrong
direction this evening was not the only one of its kind today.

- mi'e .kreig.