On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:41:02PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
xod:
{le du} is a perfectly acceptable translation of "they". The
question
is:
is unbound ko'a meaningless, or is it equivalent to {le du}.
How do you use le du?
As a specific reference without any identificatory description -- much
like
English "them".
Could you give an example text in Lojban?
le du cu frili
-- where "le du" might here refer to the act of giving an example text in
Lojban.
How does {le du} (something like the thing which I describe as being
equal to some thing(s) (which are obviously itself, because they
are equal to it...)) differ from {le co'e}?
(That is, aside from being more esoteric).
It seems to me like they are the same, except that {le co'e} is
more "honest" (for lack of a better word).
Of course, in *real* usage, in a case where the referent wasn't
recently mentioned, you'd probably say "zo'e". (If it were mentioned,
you'd use zo'e or ri/ra/ru/lerfu).