la'o me. Timothy Lawrence .me cusku di'e
Are these also valid?
* xu do jimpe
* xu do jimpe di'u
* mi'e lo cilre fi la.lojban.
* xu di'u smudra
gejyspa already commented on the second sentence, but more importantly the third sentence is actually grammatically incorrect in that {fi la .lojban.} is a completely separate sumti from {lo cilre}. You have to use {be} to "inject" {fi la .lojban.} into {cilre} so that you are left with a single _expression_:
{mi'e lo cilre be fi la .lojban.}
"I am learner-about-Lojban."
Similarly, {lo klama be lo tcadu} is a goer to the city, but {lo klama lo tcadu} is two sumti -- "A goer, a city".
But you could also just say {mi cilre fi la .lojban.} instead of using {mi'e}.
mi'e la selpa'i mu'o
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.