[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Re: Beyond Whorf: "things," "qualities," and the origin of nouns and adjectives
- To: lojban@egroups.com
- Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Beyond Whorf: "things," "qualities," and the origin of nouns and adjectives
- From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:20:55 GMT
la aulun cusku di'e
.i le botpi be lo xunre vanju se pu spofu
{se} goes after the tense, but in this case you don't
want {se}, right?
Also, that means that the bottle was broken in the past
(maybe by now it has been fixed). Do you mean that, or do
you mean that it is now broken {ca spofu}, or that it
broke in the past {pu porpi}?
.i .oi mi na ba pinxe le
selpofbo'i
That is fine. But don't tell me that {le na ba se pinxe
be do cu se botpi}, which would be confusing, even though
you could weasel out of it by talking of potentialities.
co'o mi'e xorxes
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com