In a message dated 3/30/2002 12:25:34 PM Central Standard Time, phma@webjockey.net writes:On Saturday 30 March 2002 12:59, pycyn@aol.com wrote: See corrections sent directly after original. <> le ni la fred bilma cu zmadu le ni la djordj bilma le ni ce'u rinka le nu > le bilma cu roble That says that George's symptoms are the amount of causation.> Ditto <. {lenu la fred. bilma cu zmadu lenu la djordj. bilma kei leka ce'u rinka leka ce'u ruble} sounds pretty clear, even though the first ce'u is the illness and the second is Fred or George. {leni ... leni} may be better.> I'd say {leni} {le ni} {le ni} {le nu} (indeed, did say). The last {le ka} is almost certainly wrong with {rinka}. I would say that the one before was a property of events of causing, not a property of cases of illness (see first suggestion), but that is only one construal of the mess in Refgram and Lojbab's mind. Still, I'd replace that {ka} with {du'u}, to ease worries about where the {ce'u} might be hiding, if nothing else. <If I weren't teaching about abstractions and subordinate clauses, I'd say {lenu la fred. bilma cu blerikmau lenu la djordj. bilma}.> And so would we all, I hope -- or something very like. |