Le jeudi 29 décembre 2022 à 11 h 17 min 45 s UTC+3, yanni...@gmail.com a écrit :
Thank you for your many answers. So it seems I can write:
the gendered version
le melbi ke cmalu ke nakni dansu
the beautiful ( small ( male dancer)
le melbi ke cmalu ke fetsi dansu
the beautiful ( small ( female dancer)
the gendered affix version
le melbi ke cmalu nakydansu
the beautiful ( small male-dancer)
le melbi ke cmalu fe'idansu
the beautiful ( small female-dancer)
fe'irdansu (fe'idansu are two words)
But is there a semantic or pragmatic difference between "ke nakni dansu" and "nakydansu"?
lujvo can have meaning separate from their underlying tanru. E.g. {bramlatu} may mean "Big Cat" (lion, tiger etc.) as opposed to "big cat" which might be just {barda mlatu} or {lo mlatu poi barda}
What I mean is: under what circumstances would you choose the affixed rather than the non-affixed version?
Is is that using "ke nakni" would mean emphasizing on the gender?
I noticed that some of you use the particle je and others ke, what is the difference?
ke ... [ke'e] is a pair of brackets showing scope within tanru. Tanru by definition are vague entities so the logical AND operator je would be more precise.
Thanks again,
Yannis
"Mark E. Shoulson" <ma...@kli.org> writes:
> You can also work ninmu/nanmu or fetsi/nakni into the the description
> itself and not use a relative clause as gleki has done below.
I agree with Mark. I'd probably go with something like:
{le pa cmalu je melbi je ninmu dansu} and
{le pa cmalu je melbi je nanmu dansu}.
But in real-life Lojban, "the beautiful little dancer" would most likely
occur with an antecedent, i.e.:
{pa lo ninmu cu sanli le tsina}
A woman stands on the stage.
{.i logo'i noi cmalu je melbi cu dansu}
[it/she], which/who is small and beautiful, dances.
In such usage, the gender is indicated upon first mention, with the
description referring to the gendered antecedent. It might be clearer
to examine the Lojban translation of "a beautiful little dancer."