On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:51 AM, David Gowers (kampu) <
00ai99@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:01 AM, Remo Dentato <
rdentato@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:27 AM, <
kfa@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Coi,
>>>
>>> I found out rather accidentally that the following parses: {ry fuzme fa ry
>>> lo
>>> nu...} or {ry fuzme fa vo'a lo nu...}. Would this be a good way of saying
>>> "it's r's own fault that..." with putting emphasis on "own" as alternative
>>> to
>>> {ba'e}?
>>>
>>
>> I like the idea. The risk is that it may be confusing if abused.
>>
>> remo
>>
>
> IMO it is confusing to start with. normally, an argument is a single
> item -- you cannot fill a place twice.. instead you can fill it with,
> for example: lo xunre .e lo blabi
>
> -- my understanding of the grammar is that {lo xunre .e lo blabi} is a
> single sumti,
> and {lo xunre ku carmi fa lo blabi} has an undefined meaning.
>
> In this vein, {ry .e ry fuzme lo nu..} is a way of expressing the
> strange type of emphasis expressed above, in a more simple idiom.
>
You most certainly can fill the same place twice. See CLL, 9.3.9