[lojban-beginners] Re: [lojban-beginners]

["H. Felton" <fagricipni@gmail.com>]

On 10/3/08, Minimiscience <minimiscience@gmail.com> wrote:
> de'i li 03 pi'e 10 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. H. Felton .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
>
> > [New Speaker]: lo* se rirni be pendo be mi be'o be'o
>  > I think this means "child of my friend".  I think that "be" is the
>  > cmavo used to attach a new brivla to modify the first brivla _and_
>  > specify some of the sumti of the new brivla, but I am not sure this
>  > means what I want it to mean
> .skamyxatra

>  You're almost right.  "{be}" attaches a {sumti} to the {selbri} before it,
>  filling in one of the places of the {selbri}.  The correct translation for
>  "child of my friend" would be "{lo se rirni be lo pendo be mi}" (the "{be'o}"s
>  aren't needed unless the next word is a "{bei}" continuing the internal {sumti}
>  of a higher-level {selbri}).

>  > *I'm not sure about that "lo", the changes in the gadri are something
>  > I am still uncertain about, but I need to think about that a little
>  > while longer before I can ask for clarification.

> If the thing referenced is actually a child, rather than one whom you are
>  simply referring to as a child, then "{lo}" is the preferred {gadri}.

Actually, as I recalled after I had left the computer, since the
answer to a "mo" question should be a selbri not a sumti, no gadri
should be prefixed to the entire expression; the omission of the
internal gadri is indeed a mistake on my part.