Modulo the fact that strictly speaking we need
lu'i mi'o ctuca simxu . Jorge Llambías thinks that we can get away with using masses to mean sets. However, consider the following example, from my mail about xorlo: lu'i ci loi nanmu simxu lo nu damba . If I understand xorlo correctly, this means "three groups of men fight against each other", where "each other" means between the groups, not within them. Suppose we drop the lu'i . The result is ci loi nanmu simxu lo nu damba . If we allow substituting masses into the first place of sixmu , this might mean "three groups of men fight within each other", that is, each group fights within itself. Thus an ambiguity results. Maybe in simple unambiguous cases like mi'o ctuca simxu we can stretch the rules a bit.
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Joshua Choi
<joshua@choi.name> wrote:
Ah! I see; thanks!
On 6 September 2009, at 10:40 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote:
On Sunday 06 September 2009 13:32:07 Joshua Choi wrote:
A tiny question on tanru: for the bridi "mi'o simxu lo nu ctuca" ("We
teach one another"), if I wanted to use a tanru to say that in a more
ambiguous but shorter way, would I say "mi'o simxu ctuca"? Or do I
have to switch simxu's places or something?
mi'o ctuca simxu
mu'o