From araizen@newmail.net Sat Nov 24 11:48:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 24 Nov 2001 19:48:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 61314 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2001 19:48:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Nov 2001 19:48:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sphere.barak.net.il) (212.150.48.98) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Nov 2001 19:48:51 -0000 Received: from out.newmail.net ([10.10.11.10]) by sphere.barak.net.il (InterMail vK.4.03.00.00 201-232-121 license 5444ddd44659357c6c93343e0ce38507) with SMTP id <20011124194742.URO10856.sphere@out.newmail.net> for ; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 21:47:42 +0200 Received: from default ([62.0.181.217]) by out.newmail.net ; Sat, 24 Nov 2001 20:48:52 +0200 Message-ID: <01e301c17587$30dfe9a0$d9b5003e@default> To: "lojban" References: Subject: Re: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu? Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 07:58:48 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 From: "Adam Raizen" X-Yahoo-Profile: araizen la .and. cusku di'e > 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. Well, there are ways to affirm and negate almost any part of a sentence. But the reason 'xu' is in UI and not NA is because it stands for a question from one of several grammatically unrelated selma'o (NA, NAhE, a couple members of UI, etc.) NA is just the most common, I guess. mu'o mi'e .adam.