On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Pierre Abbat
<phma@bezitopo.org> wrote:
On Wednesday, January 02, 2013 22:05:10 Remo Dentato wrote:
> Ok, but if (following the {-gau} pattern)
> {ko'a rodme'a ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u fo'a}
> means
> {ko'a mleca lo su'u ko'e broda ko'i k'o' ko'u fo'a}
>
> I fail to understand how something may be less than an abstraction. The
> problem is that mleca2 is the term of comparison.
"-me'a" follows the same pattern as "-mau"/"-zma".
"ko'a rodme'a ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u fo'a" means
"ko'a mleca ko'e lo ni ce'u broda ko'i ko'o ko'u fo'a". At least I think
that's right; I'm not sure where to put lo ve mleca.
E.g. "mi nelme'a do lo cakla" means "I like chocolate less than you do." This
is not to be confused with "mecnei", e.g. "mi necmei lo cakla lo najnimre" (I
like chocolate less than oranges). "neizma" and "zmanei" are their respective
antonyms.
Based on
http://dag.github.com/cll/12/15/:
"I like chocolate less than you" is {mi nelme'a do lo cakla} (antonym = neizma)
"I like chocolate less than oranges" is {lo cakla lo najnimre selnelme'a mi} (antonym = selneizma) (Using {te} would put the subject in front, but would also effectively reverse the meanings: {mi te selnelme'a lo najnimre lo cakla} = "I like oranges more than chocolate.")
Pierre
--
I believe in Yellow when I'm in Sweden and in Black when I'm in Wales.