Subject: Re: [lojban] ce'u once again

From: Adam Raizen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 14:40:39 +0200

la pycyn. cusku di'e

> 'nei' refers to the current bridi, and so 'le nei' refers to the x1 of
> blegau in each case. Selbri are not bridi, but if you want to be
> obstinate and insist that they are, change 'le nei' to 'cy.'>
>
> OK, what you meant was {le bilma be fi le nei}, as several other places.
The
> problem with {nei} is that it is in three bridi (in some sense of that
term)
> and there is then the question of which is the "current" one. You say it
is
> the middle one of the three and the closest one that is not an immediate
> sumti, so I take it that your definition of "current" comes down to that
> specification. That seems a good choice, but not an obvious one. I don't
> understand the remark about selbri -- they are obviously not bridi, but
you
> can scarcely have bridi without them -- or them without bridi.

'le + SELBRI' may logically imply a bridi, but grammatically it requires a
selbri, not a bridi.

The BNF definition is:

sumti-6 = (LA | LE) # sumti-tail /KU#/ (among other things)
sumti-tail = [sumti-6 [relative-clauses]] sumti-tail-1 | relative-clauses
sumti-tail-1
sumti-tail-1 = [quantifier] selbri [relative clauses] | quantifier sumti
^^^^^^
If you want to say, e.g. 'the one who loves his/herself' you need to use
'sevzi' as in 'le sezyprami' or use a construction with a bridi, like 'ko'a
poi prami le nei'.

mu'o mi'e .adam.