From phma@oltronics.net Thu Nov 15 10:38:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 15 Nov 2001 18:38:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 16279 invoked from network); 15 Nov 2001 18:38:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 15 Nov 2001 18:38:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (216.189.29.239) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Nov 2001 18:37:15 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5C81A3C5CA; Thu, 15 Nov 2001 13:15:14 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Reply-To: phma@oltronics.net To: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu? Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 13:15:12 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01111513151207.03953@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Thursday 15 November 2001 09:08, And Rosta wrote: > If it makes sense to ask a yes/no question about a specific part of > the sentence then it also makes sense to affirm or negate a > specific part of the sentence. Just as xo behaves like a PA and > ma behaves like a KOhA, so xu should behave like a JAhA. To affirm or negate a specific part of the sentence we use {naku} or {na'e}. {na'e} negates one word, so it behaves like {xu} except that it precedes the word; {naku} negates from there to the end of the bridi. A kind of question that might be useful is where in the sentence a negation goes. phma