From cowan@ccil.org Thu Aug 09 14:47:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 9 Aug 2001 21:47:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 23646 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2001 21:47:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Aug 2001 21:47:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Aug 2001 21:47:32 -0000 Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15UxeV-00024B-00; Thu, 09 Aug 2001 17:47:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [lojban] ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a In-Reply-To: from And Rosta at "Aug 6, 2001 11:16:45 pm" To: And Rosta Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 17:47:39 -0400 (EDT) Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan And Rosta scripsit: > As I said in an earlier message, Q-kau is modelled on natlangs (including > English) and we use Q-kau where natlangs use indirect questions. Where *some* natlangs use i.q.s. Some, indeed, use only relative clauses, and simply consider the difference between "I know who went to the store" and "I know him who went to the store" to be too small to worry about (= let the context handle it). Turkish IIRC is one of these. > But yes, so long as an implicit zo'e can't be interpreted as a ce'u (i.e. > so long as ce'u can't be omitted) then yes, du'u ce'u would be a welcome > purification. In ka-clauses, at least, most ce'us *are* omitted. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter