Subject: Re: ka'e (was: Re: [lojban] Introduction, and zutse/se sutse

From: Invent Yourself <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:17:37 -0500 (EST)

On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, And Rosta wrote:

> >>> Invent Yourself <[email-masked]> 11/14/01 05:39pm >>>
> #On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, And Rosta wrote:
> #> >>> Invent Yourself <[email-masked]> 11/14/01 05:21pm >>>
> #> #On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, And Rosta wrote:
> #> #> 2. The "innately capable of" is open to the objection raised by Jorge --
> #> #> that it wrongly privileges one sumti.
> #> #
> #> #Not so fast. Which sumti is wrongly privileged in "ka'e klama da"?
> #>
> #> The goer. I assume on the basis of canonical examples that it is the
> #> goer that is innately capable of going somewhere.
> #
> #.ienai .i le selkla po'o cu selsnu
>
> Not really. Ignoring the ka'e, your sentence says "you-know-what
> goes somewhere from you-know-where via you-know-where...".

pe'i le drata tergismu cu selnibli jena selsnu

> #.i ku'i le mulno ckini cu cumki
> #.i ko lanli "mi pu klama" .i le mulno ckini cu purci
>
> This is correct. ka'e should be similar, hence the objection to
> "innately capable".

.ie .i pe'i na fancu zo pu (noi zo ka'e pagbu ke'a ku'o) le bridi

-- 
I hope they confuse the two and toss away the lit flare while holding
the lit dynamite stick as a statue of Liberty Torch. That would make my
day- for at least a 1/4 hour. -- Fernando