[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ko ko kurji
- To: Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: ko ko kurji
- From: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
- Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:15:36 -0400
- Organization: Lojban Peripheral
- Reply-to: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
- Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
la djordj. cusku di'e
> > Yes. "ko do kurji" is "Take care of yourself!" and "do ko kurji"
> > is "Be the one who takes care of you!"
>
> Surely the last means "Be the one who is taken care of by you!"?
Whoops, yes. Lojbab also pointed this out.
> Right... so in Lojban it's not actually a property of the bridi,
> but of the individual 2nd-person pronoun?
I think it's still correct to call imperativeness a bridi property
that happens to be expressed on a sumti. Contradictory negation, e.g.,
is also a bridi property, though it is expressed on the selbri
using "na".
> I wonder if it would
> have been useful to be able to make other prosumti imperative,
> i.e. "Make me speak in Lojban" would be "?? tavla fo la lojban",
> where ?? is an imperative version of "mi". How would this be
> expressed in Lojban at the moment? "ko xlura mi lenu mi tavla
> fo la lojban", or something similar?
Sounds good to me. You can also say "ko zo'u mi tavla fo la lojban.",
using the topic-comment construction, but your version is clearer.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org
You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn.
You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn.
Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)