[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] "Negation" of relative clauses
- To: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Subject: Re: [lojban] "Negation" of relative clauses
- From: "Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 11:04:19 -0300
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=AxrIFO6T+ugPl//UbrAkt18DU3nPogYHK3oec0b3itzOeFmgSReu4S+rdYiFZgYtXeC8s67BCASndJE+9jqqY4RtOxHHq8L89omvsAXypmaDhzRTaizCJp6NuWQJ9Ep/jjug9T+Szrl0OKVmNmO7m9KBJIv1PsDAmXcsiQBjals=
- In-reply-to: <1797760549.20060414133306@mail.ru>
- References: <1797760549.20060414133306@mail.ru>
- Sender: nobody <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>
On 4/14/06, Yanis Batura <ybatura@mail.ru> wrote:
>
> Can {pe do} be negated, like in English
> "I like all cars that are not of you.", or
> "I like all [not-your] cars."
The natural way to do it would be with {pe nai do},
but that is not grammatical at the moment. I have proposed
that {nai} be moved to selma'o CAI so that it can be used
after any word. Now you can say {pe sai do} or {pe ru'e do}
but not {pe nai do}.
mu'o mi'e xorxes