On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Jonathan Jones
<eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
If you don't believe that you can own a pet, that's okay, that just means "la clalis ponse lo mlatu na'e bo la aionys" :-)
(in any case, you're okay here, because "se dalpe'o" works, too.
--gejyspa
I think the relationship between a pet and it's caretaker is a unique
bond that has similarities to the relationship between a person and his
friends, and boss and her subordinates, and a person and his property,
but is not truly the same as any of these. But that's not really
important, as it's a philosophical opinion and we're discussing grammar.
I agree. You're the one that said you didn't want to use "ponse" because of your philosophy. I merely point out that the te ponse enables you to limit the universe of who recognizes this ownership. In the eyes of the majority of cultures and governments, you can ponse lo dalpe'o. In some cultures, you can ponse lo gunka. In some, you can ponse lo fetspe, and in some, you can ponse lo panzi. But like I said, you can use "se dalpe'o", be uncontroversial and true to your philosophy.
--gejyspa