Re: [lojban] RE: Intro and Questions

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

pc:
>xorxes:
><<pc:
> >you might even be allowed {le do zo zo'u}).
>
>It doesn't parse. You can make it {le do me zo zo'u},
>or, weird but possible, {le do pa zo zo'u}.>>
>
>Thanks.  I can't get this rule straight.  I suppose that the problem here 
>is that {le} absorbs {do} into a new LE.  Does it absorb {pu} and {vi} as 
>well?

I don't think that's how it works. You can insert {do}
into {le me zo zo'u} or into {le pa zo zo'u}, but you
cannot insert it into {le zo zo'u} because this is not
a well formed sumti. At least that's how I picture it.
You can't say that {le} absorbs {do} into a new LE,
because in that case the new LE would absorb {zo zo'u}
into yet another LE.

co'o mi'e xorxes

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Porsche Boxter. You and a friend. Nine dream days from 
Napa Valley to Beverly Hills. Provided by CarsDirect.com. 
Click to enter.
http://click.egroups.com/1/3993/3/_/17627/_/957819067/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com