From richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com Tue Mar 20 14:44:02 2001
Return-Path: <richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com>
X-Sender: richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 20 Mar 2001 22:44:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 27017 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2001 22:44:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Mar 2001 22:44:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO scrabble.freeuk.net) (212.126.144.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Mar 2001 22:44:01 -0000
Received: from du-010-0237.freeuk.com ([212.126.153.237] helo=rrbcurnow.freeuk.com) by scrabble.freeuk.net with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1) id 14fUr8-0000mZ-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 22:43:59 +0000
Received: from richard by rrbcurnow.freeuk.com with local (Exim 2.02 #2) id 14fUmZ-000071-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 22:39:15 +0000
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 22:39:15 +0000
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [: Re: [lojban] Train catching ut nunc]
Message-ID: <20010320223915.F250@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com>
Reply-To: Richard Curnow <rpc@myself.com>
Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
References: <F103ErI7DAVQl05rz7900009850@hotmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i-nntp
In-Reply-To: <F103ErI7DAVQl05rz7900009850@hotmail.com>; from jjllambias@hotmail.com on Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 07:08:23PM +0000
Sender: Richard Curnow <richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com>
X-eGroups-From: Richard Curnow <rpc@myself.com>
From: Richard Curnow <richard@rrbcurnow.freeuk.com>

On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 07:08:23PM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> 
> la camgusmis cusku di'e
> 
> > > pu ki mi pu'o je banai snada tu'a le trene
> >
> >I believe you meant pu ki mi pu'o jenai ba snada tu'a le trene since it
> >doesn't parse otherwise.
> 
> It should parse both ways, I think. Parser bug?
> 
> The meanings also are the same as far as I can tell.
> 

tugni

However, is "pu ki mi ..." really intended? The tense binds with "mi"
then, as though "mi" is an event of some kind. I think there's a ku
missing here - maybe "pu ki ku mi" or "pu ku mi" was intended?

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard P. Curnow rpc@myself.com
Weston-super-Mare
United Kingdom http://go.to/richard.curnow/


