On 30/10/2014 02:43, Martin Bays wrote:
What's wrong with {broda xoi ke'a rapli li no} → {lo nu broda cu rapli li no}?A sumtcita ↔ bridi relative clause conversion table could look like the below: SE ba X = xoi ke'a SE balvi X vau se pi'o X = xoi X se pilno fi ke'a vau SE ka'a X = xoi fasnu fa ke'a jo'u lo nu X SE klama vau fau X = xoi fasnu fa ke'a jo'u X vau (Here {ke'a} stands for the outer bridi.)I don't think it's clear that every tag permits such a definition. e.g. I don't think {no roi} does.
Yeah, that's the tense / modal difference. As I use only pu/ca/ba in afterthought tag connections, I've forgotten the other tenses were also affected.Furthermore, {ba} and {pu} are irregular sumtcita, in that their underlying predicate is inversed when they're used with {bo}: • { brode .ije *ba bo* brodo } = { brode .ije *ba* lo nu go'i cu brodo } (irregular ba/pu sumtcita) • { brode .ije *ki'u bo* brodo } = { brode .ije *se ki'u* lo nu go'i cu brodo } (regular sumtcita)(I don't agree that these are literally equivalences, but probably you didn't mean to claim that.) Isn't the difference you're highlighting just the (annoying!) difference between tenses and other tags in afterthought? Martin
mi'e la .ilmen. mu'o -- 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/d/optout.