[lojban-beginners] Re: la'e di'u

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Wednesday 01 April 2009 13:37:58 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>  la jon na zanfri lo nu rokci cpare (or "cpare lo rokci" to be more
> precise) .iku'i jy  (NOT "la jy". "jy" is already a sumti by itself,
> "J") zukte lo se go'i

You could also say ".iku'i ra zukte ri" (unless "ri" would refer to "ra", in 
which case "ra zukte ra"). If you had said "lo nu cpare lo rokci", that might 
be interpreted as ".iku'i la jon. zukte lo rokci", which doesn't make sense, 
so then you'd try "lo nu cpare lo rokci" as the referent.

"zukte", btw, means "does on purpose". "gasnu" is better, I think.

On Wednesday 01 April 2009 15:27:17 Minimiscience wrote:
> "{la luk.bergen.}"
>
> It falls under the "{la}" because that's the only place it can go; you
> can't have free-floating {cmevla} in a sentence unless they're part of a
> larger structure (a {sumti}, a vocative, a "{bu}" {lervla}, or as the
> delimiter of a ZOI quote).  Hence, a sequence of {sumti} preceded by a LA
> can only comprise a single {sumti}.

Some more examples:
la kot.divuar. du la xantyde'i xaskoi
.i la misisipis.rirx. midju la mergug
.i la markus.tulius.kikeron. latmo
.i la lu,is.jol.xaris. noi pagbu la .inceGAL. skoto daplu
.i la batoir.Erjebet. magjaro ke porsi catra

mu'omi'e .pier.