Subject: Re: [lojban] Reading lojban textbook

From: Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 08:44:48 -0600 (MDT)

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, And Rosta wrote:

> >>> Jay Kominek <[email-masked]> 10/02/01 06:10pm >>>
> #On Mon, 1 Oct 2001, Alex Gontmakher wrote:
> #> In Lesson 04:
> #>
> #> .i ma cu sumti zo klama
> #>
> #> shouldn't it be:
> #>
> #> .i zo klama sumti ma
> #
> #Without looking at the context, I can tell you that the word "klama" isn't
> #a sumti, so "zo klama sumti" is going to be wrong.
> #
> #"klama" is however, a brivla, so "sumti zo klama" makes sense.
>
> I see nothing wrong with "zo klama sumti ma": although "klama"
> is not a valid sumti, "zo klama" is. It might, for example be a sumti
> of brivla "melbi", say.

lu le klama li'u na du lu klama li'u

x1 and x2 of sumti obviously have to be some sort of quoted text (or
reference to it), and the thing which is a sumti is the text being quoted,
not the quotation.

- Jay Kominek <[email-masked]>
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose