From jjllambias@hotmail.com Fri Jun 30 16:54:08 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14971 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 23:54:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Jun 2000 23:54:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.79) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 23:54:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 84998 invoked by uid 0); 30 Jun 2000 23:54:08 -0000 Message-ID: <20000630235408.84997.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.153.116 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 16:54:08 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.153.116] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Opposite of za'o Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 16:54:08 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la pycyn cusku di'e >But isn't {na za'o} either ungrammatical or exactly equivalent to {zo'o >na}, >{na} having to occur immediately before the predicate and yet govering the >whole bridi? It is both grammatical and (I think) not equivalent. {na} can alternate with as many tenses as it pleases, and the whole thing occurs immediately before the predicate and governs the whole bridi. {na roroi} should be equipollent to {su'oroi na}. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com