| In a message dated 8/28/2001 4:12:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
xod@sixgirls.org writes: Excuse me if this completely obvious to most of you. Well, I have trouble with the first line, that {ni} and {ka} are similar. What is the role of {ce'u} in {ni}, which is apparently a quantity and so a complete object, not a function and so incomplete. I can, in fact, imagine a functional sense of {ni} and {ce'u} may be a very efficient way to do that: ko'a frica ko'e le ni ce'u prami la meris. But that has to wait until we understand what is a good first argument for {ni prami}, which we don't really have yet. <le ka mi prami my lovingness (phantom ce'u in prami1, none anywhere else)> I thought that phantom {ce'u} disappeared in the absence of any explanation for how it interacted with the visible {mi}. Shifting the {mi} to {pe} or {be} hardly improves matters: {ka} isn't possessible like {si'o} -- and the {mi} would hardly have done that originally anyhow, nor does {p/be} work to instantiate a {ce'u}. So the point of all of this is lost at the moment. <le ka mi prami --> le kamprami be mi = le kamprami pe mi> OK, what place structure did you choose for {kamprami}? So that er can know what this is supposed to mean. <le nilprami pe mi> Ditto. |