Subject: Re: djan. melbi vecnu

From: "Adam Raizen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 22:18:54 -0000

John Cowan wrote:

> Adam Raizen wrote:
> 
> 
> > It would have been nice to have a pro-sumti which refers to 
whatever
> > is in the prenex in a case like this. I think I'll try 
using "ce'u",
> > since it kind of focuses the main bridi with regard to the prenex,
> > though it probably would have been better to just have a different
> > word.
> 
> 
> You can use "ri", "ra", "ru" for this purpose, or "<sumti> goi ko'a
> zo'u ... ko'a ... in forethought.

The sumti isn't always the previous one, and 'ra' and 'ru' are a 
little vague, '<sumti> goi ko'a' is too wordy to be elegant, and a 
lerfu word might not be clear if there's more than one sumti that 
begins with the lerfu as in "la nu,IORK zo'u la norm klama fi la 
nu,IORK".

I haven't ever seen multiple sumti in the prenex when the prenex is 
being used as a topic marker and not a logical prenex, but it would 
be interesting to consider what it might mean and how it might be 
used.

mu'o mi'e adam