Re: [lojban] GIhA question

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Sunday 02 January 2011 00:28:42 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>   I'd have to say that in the absence of an EXPLICIT "zo'e", they are
> not inserted in the bridi tail.  And (as my example), if an explicit
> zo'e is located in the bridi tail, it would have to be inserted in the
> first available space (that is to say, the first place not explicitly
> filled by something).  It would seem to be the most natural method of
> understanding these constructions.

I don't think that an explicit "zo'e" in this construction would do anything 
different from leaving it out. The only places I know of where an 
explicit "zo'e" means anything different from omission is in a subordinate or 
relative clause, where "ce'u" or "ke'a" would be assumed to fill an omitted 
place and "zo'e" indicates that the place is in fact empty.

Pierre
-- 
Don't buy a French car in Holland. It may be a citroen.

-- 
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.