From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Jul 06 17:32:31 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12044 invoked from network); 7 Jul 2000 00:32:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Jul 2000 00:32:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.197) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Jul 2000 00:32:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 5814 invoked by uid 0); 7 Jul 2000 00:32:31 -0000 Message-ID: <20000707003231.5813.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.154.3 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 06 Jul 2000 17:32:31 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.154.3] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: Incidental sumti (was: Re: [lojban] Vocabulary) Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 17:32:31 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la elrond cusku di'e >I think I found a solution to my own problem: >ko'a .eta'o lu'a A ce B ce C cu broda I think {lu'a} is "at least one of the members of...", so in this case you should use {ro lu'a ...} >However, this does not keep the "A B C are also examples of sumti in the >cu broda-ing situation" meaning. Why not? >is "mu'a" truly an attitudinal (in the >sense that I can insert it without changing the grammar of what surrounds >it) ? Yes, it belongs to selmaho UI co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com