Re: tanru

["opi_lauma" <opi_lauma@yahoo.com>]

> > From my point of view it would be better to
> > postulate that (for example):
> >
> > "sumti1 selbri2 selbri1 sumti2" = "lo nu sumti1 selbri1 sumti2 cu 
> > selbri2"
> > It is
> > "la tam. melbi tavla la meris" = "lo nu la tam tavla la meris cu 
> > melbi".
>
> tanru are the simplest way to modify predicates, so the idea
> is to make them usable with many different types of
> modification. If we restrict it to one type, then we can't use
> it for other common types, such as:
>
> ta blabi xirma
> That's a white horse.
>
> That's unlikely to be interpreted as {lo nu ta xirma cu blabi}.

Why not? If I say {lo nu la tam tavla la meris} I see the following
picture "Two persons, Tom and Marry, and the first person tells
something to the second person", then I use this picture as a sumti.
In the same way, if I say {lo nu ta xirma} I have in mind picture of
horse, and then this picture can be used as sumti in a sentence, to
say, for example, that it (sumti) is white.