El miércoles, 3 de diciembre de 2014 21:48:11 UTC-5, Pierre Abbat escribió:
On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 13:01:26 la durka wrote:
> However (again), that leaves a subtle problem with scope. {na} scopes over
> the {ki'u} clause, so this says "It's not true that (I can jump because I'm
> a white man)", i.e. "Being a white man is not the reason that I can jump".
> It should be flipped to get the correct scoping, as in {ki'u da'i lo nu mi
> kapli nakni kei mi na kakne lo ka plipe}, or you can split it into two
> jufra as {mi na kakne lo ka plipe .i da'i lo nu mi kapli nakni cu krinu [lo
> du'u go'i]}.
> (Sorry. Negation can make things complicated.)
The order of terms doesn't affect the scope of {na}; it negates the whole
bridi. It does affect the scope of {naku}, which is a term (but not a sumti).
{naku} negates from there to the end of the bridi. So you can say {ki'u da'i
lo nu mi kapli nakni kei mi naku kakne lo ka plipe}.
Most people these days seem to treat {na selbri} as {naku selbri}, essentially.
There's another thing you can do with the sentence: negate {ki'u}. You can put
{na'e}, {to'e}, or {no'e} before it, or put {nai} after it. I'm not sure what
the difference is. You can even do both and join two bridi with
{ito'eki'unaibo}.
Pierre
--
li fi'u vu'u fi'u fi'u du li pa