[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban-beginners] Re: A problem with cu

coi xorxes.

la xorxes. cusku di'e

> la iens cusku di'e
> >Thanks for your answers. If I would recognize {nu mi cilre fi
> >la lojban.} in {lenu mi cilre fi la lojban. cu xamgu mi} as a
> >selbri the {cu} in this sentence would be clear. Let's see what
> >I understand with my little knowledge about Lojban. If I don't
> >use {cu} {xamgu} would be x5 of {cilre}. Then the sentence doesn't
> >make any sense to me.
> No, it's not that. {xamgu} is not a sumti, so it cannot fill
> a sumti place. {xamgu} is a selbri. What you are missing is
> that if you put two selbri words together, you get another
> selbri. You need {cu} in {le broda cu brode} so that {broda}
> and {brode} don't form a tanru. The same situation
> occurs if you replace {broda} with {nu mi cilre fi la lojban}.

Let's see whether I understand it.

{le cilre cu xamgu} - learning is good
{le cilre xamgu} - (a tanru I cannot translate)
{lenu mi cilre cu xamgu} - the event of my learning is good
{lenu mi cilre xamgu} - the event of my doing (tanru)
{lenu mi cilre zo'e cu xamgu} - the event of my learning something
   is good

In the last sentence I need {cu} because {lenu zo'e (selbri)
zo'e ...} is always another selbri. But this selbri doesn't have
x1, x2, ... like gismus. (?)

mu'o mi'e .iens.
(Is {ki'e mu'o mi'e .iens.} something like {Thanks, ...}?)