[lojban] [oz] {ny poi cy ke'a falcru}

[Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>]

The full passage is:
  {lo nàrge cu tai cmàlu .i ja'e bo ny poi cy ke'a fàlcru cu ja'a ru'e se zmàmei ny poi cy ke'a pùnji lo lànka}

Here, {ny poi cy ke'a falcru}, clearly means something equivalent to either {lo narge poi cy ke'a falcru} or to what I would write as {lo me ny poi cy ke'a falcru}. To me, an anaphoric _expression_ always has exactly the same referent as the antecedent. What do you think?

doi la selpa'i, what is your idea behind this usage? Do you think the anaphora just occurs at the superficial textual level, so that {ny} would be equivalent to {lo narge}? Or do you think that {ko'a poi broda} is meaningful in general, so that {ko'a} can in effect refer to a strict part of ko'a, i.e, as in {lo me ko'a}?

mu'o
mi'e .asiz.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.