Re: [lojban-beginners] mi kakne lo bajra

[Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Oren <get.oren@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can someone clarify why:
> sentence A:
> { mi kakne lo bajra }
> is not as good as
> sentence B:
> { mi kakne lo nu bajra }
>
> Assuming the rationale is that "nu" is necessary to mark an event/state, it
> seems to me that since (event/state) is inherent in the x2 argument of
> kakne, that adding the 'nu' would be superfluous.
> Assuming the argument is that it becomes nonsensical to say sentence A, i.e.
> "You can't say I can runner," I would think that argument is based on
> English concepts of proper grammar, and that there should be no a priori
> reason something like "I can runner" is "nonsensical."
> Or is there some other veciski?
>

  Since the x2 of kakne is an event, the first sentence says you are
capable of some "running event".  That is, some event that runs
(whatever that maybe intended to mean), not an event OF running.  For
a less confusing contrast:
a)mi kakne lo drata

b)mi kakne lo nu drata

  The first says "I am capable of other things".  The second second
says "I am capable of being different"

                 --gejyspa

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.