On Friday 07 May 2010 14:16:31 Jorge Llambías wrote:
> Well, that's how I would say it in any case. To me it means that John
> is languaged by English, not that he is specifically making use of it
> right now.
I could probably go to Arpitany and, after a few days, understand most of what
they're saying, but I wouldn't say "mi se bangu lo .arpitano" because I still
wouldn't be able to assemble correct Arpitan sentences. (Arpitan is a Romance
language. I know enough French and Spanish to figure out most of most Romance
languages.)
On Friday 07 May 2010 15:15:46 Jonathan Jones wrote:
> I don't agree. When I see a definition like "x1 understands/comprehends
> fact/truth x2 (du'u) about subject x3; x1 understands (fi) x3, I take it to
> mean that
> {zo'e jimpe zo'e zo'e} means "x1 understands/comprehends fact/truth x2
> (du'u) about subject x3"
> {zo'e jimpe fi zo'e} means " "x1 understands (fi) x3"
"zo'e" and skipping a place are equivalent, except in an abstraction or
relative clause where an empty place may be assumed filled with "ke'a"
or "ce'u" instead of "zo'e". "zo'e jimpe zo'e zo'e" means the same as
just "jimpe".
On Friday 07 May 2010 16:09:14 Jonathan Jones wrote:
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Jonathan Jones <
eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2010/5/7 Jorge Llambías <
jjllambias@gmail.com>
> > <snip>
> >
> >> But "facki fi da" does not mean "tolcri da".
> >
> > <snip>
>
> xu lu mi facki lo se zvati lo mi ckiku li'u drata lu mi tolcri lo mi ckiku
> li'u
mapku pe le bersa be la lizbet. zvati le mi dakli .i mi tolcri le mapku gi'e
jungau la lizbet. le du'u le mapku cu zvati makau .i la lizbet. facki le se
zvati be le mapku gi'enai tolcri le mapku