[lojban-beginners] Re: grammar check for my first few sentences

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Stela Selckiku <selckiku@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're saying that "abstractor, bridi, tense, brivla" such as "nu
> broda ca brode", forms a tanru?

"abstractor, selbri, tense, brivla", yes.

(The tense plus the selbri constitute the bridi that goes inside the
abstractor.)

It is tempting to think of the tense as going with the final brivla,
but in fact the abstractor is not closed yet, so the inner bridi has
first dibs on "tense [ku]" as a term. Notice that a "na" instead of a
tense would not have this problem because the "ku" of "na ku" is not
elidable, so "na" without "ku" could not be a term of the abstracted
bridi.

It was probably a bad idea to make the "ku" of "tag ku" elidable in
the first place. I would be in favor of making it non-elidable, in
which case the sentence would parse as you expected.


> Is this right then:  ta nu klama ba prenu  --  that's some
> event-of-going-later type of people over there.
>
> dei nu pilno le tarmi ca jufra  --  this is an event of using the
> shape now sentence
>
> mi cusku lo pu'u cilre fi la .lojban. pu selsku  --  i speak a process
> of having learned about lojban type of expression
>
> Now I get it!?

Yes. I wouldn't elide the "ku" in those cases, just to avoid
confusion, but that's how the grammar is currently defined.

mu'o mi'e xorxes