Subject: Re: noxemol ce'u

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 01:06:41 -0000

la pycyn cusku di'e

> and I am not perfectly sure at the moment what {voi ke'a broda 
> ce'u} amounts to: voi presumably needs a bridi and {ke'a broda 
ce'u} is a 
> property (at best).

Presumably you will allow {la dubia frica la tclsis ce'u}
where I would want {la dubias frica le tclsis le ka ce'u du makau}?
(They differ in who they are.) Or will you insist on using 
{le du be ce'u} there? Is {ce'u} by itself a function or does 
it depend on {le} to turn it into one?

I think it is du'u/ka in conjunction with ce'u that creates the
function, not le. Is {re pendo be ce'u} also a function?

> Alternatively, what other theor have you to suggest, either for 
{ce'u} and 
> questions or for {le broda be ce'u} (other than prohibiting the 
latter across 
> the board)?

I may come up with something eventually. I just don't like it
as a {te frica}, which to my mind requires a {ka}.

> I don't see that English allows 
> substitution in either direction, but then I am not sure English 
has exactly 
> this critters at all. 

In English you can say: "I told him the place" or "I told him 
what the place is". I'm glad we agree (I hope) that in Lojban
you can say {mi jungau ko'a le du'u makau stuzi}, but you 
can't say {mi jungau ko'a le stuzi}. Not everyone agrees with
this, some people are quite happy to mimic English here.

Now for the case where we disagree. In English we can say
"they differ in their mother" or "they differ in who their 
mother is". In Lojban we both accept {ko'a ko'e frica le ka
makau mamta ce'u}, but you also allow {ko'a ko'e frica le mamta
be ce'u}. To me this is just as unacceptable as the one above, 
for the same reason, it puts the wrong type in the place. 

mu'o mi'e xorxes