Re: [lojban] Teaching methods, especially WRT terminators, and validation thereof

[Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com>]

> As a personal quirk, when I read "lo cipni ku klama" my first instinct
> is to check back whether I have missed something. Maybe there was
> another gadri "lo lo cipni ku klama"? Or "lo bevri be lo cipni ku
> klama"? In other words, my first instict is to suspect that "klama" is
> not the selbri yet. So it takes more effort for me to process "lo
> cipni ku klama" than "lo cipni cu klama".

In before lindar says this is because you learned "wrong" .u'i

> I also agree that Bergen's "mi cu klama" should be "mi klama"; the
> "cu" is an unwarranted redundancy for a simple pro-sumti;

I might have been exaggerating a wee bit.  I used to do this when I thought of {cu} as "is/does" but I don't find myself doing it much any more.  At worst I find myself sometimes saying things like {lo kabri pe la .susyn. cu jinsa} even though the {cu} really isn't needed there.  Though that may be better blamed on my poor use/understanding of "phrases" (I'm still sometimes not sure what the difference between a "relative clause" and a "relative phrase" is.)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.