[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ce'u
la and. cusku di'e
> > In my opinion, an added x2 for {ka} won't invalidate text;
>
> Does any text contain ka with multiple noncoreferential ce'u? If so,
> this would be incompatible with x2 for {ka}.
Certainly every use of 'simxu' implicitly does, i.e. "mi ce do simxu
le ka ce'u pendo ce'u". However, this may not be a problem. One could
join the sumti together with something like "ce'o". I think there's
another problem here, though. According to the Book, pp. 260-261,
the selbri of a bridi like "mi penmi do" is "le ka ce'u prami ce'u",
and the terbri is something like "mi ce'o do". If the x2 of 'ka' is
added, then a fully explicit abstraction would be "le ka ce'u prami
ce'u kei be mi ce'o do", which semantically means the same as the
whole bridi, thus depriving us of a way to refer to just the selbri.
mu'o mi'e adam