WikiDiscuss

Posted by Eimi on Sat 21 of Jan, 2006 19:10 GMT posts: 18

> Use this thread to discuss the page: BPFK Section: Linkargs

{be}, {bei}, and {be'o} aren't used only in subordinate bridi. They can actually be used to attach sumti to any selbri. So {mi klama be le zdani} is just as legal (and has the same meaning) as {mi klama le zdani}. It's a useless use, but definitely legal. More valid (or at least less useless) is attaching sumti to elements of a tanru, ie {mi zdani be do klama}.

Posted by xorxes on Mon 04 of Jun, 2007 19:05 GMT posts: 1912

"to be attached to only the previous brivla, or another word capable of acting as a selbri"

Minor nitpick: I would say "or another tanru unit", or eventually
"or other words capable of ..." because a tanru unit may consist of
more than one word, e.g. {pa moi}, {nu broda kei},
{ke broda brode brodi kei} are all tanru units that can get linked
arguments.

"e'usai klama fa pada .e roda"
"One and everyone should come"

That's not what "pada .e roda klama" means though.
It means that exactly one comes and also that each
one comes. The only way this can be true is if there is
only one thing that comes, and that one thing is the
only thing there is in the universe of discourse.

"pada .e roda" does not really work for the idiom "one and all".

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Posted by arj on Mon 04 of Jun, 2007 19:58 GMT posts: 953

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:05:17PM -0700, xorxes wrote:
>
> Re: BPFK Section: Linkargs
>
> Author: xorxes
>
>
> "to be attached to only the previous brivla, or another word capable of acting as a selbri"
>
> Minor nitpick: I would say "or another tanru unit", or eventually
> "or other words capable of ..." because a tanru unit may consist of
> more than one word, e.g. {pa moi}, {nu broda kei},
> {ke broda brode brodi kei} are all tanru units that can get linked
> arguments.

Changed to "or other words capable of ...".

> "e'usai klama fa pada .e roda"
> "One and everyone should come"
>
> That's not what "pada .e roda klama" means though.
> It means that exactly one comes and also that each
> one comes. The only way this can be true is if there is
> only one thing that comes, and that one thing is the
> only thing there is in the universe of discourse.
>
> "pada .e roda" does not really work for the idiom "one and all".

I have replaced the example with another.

--
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
The problem is, witchcraft is not fantasy; it is a sinful reality in
our world. --christiananswers.net

On 6/4/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:05:17PM -0700, xorxes wrote:
> > "pada .e roda" does not really work for the idiom "one and all".
>
> I have replaced the example with another.

".i zo damba to sa'e lo sumti be fi li ci be'o po zo damba toi cu
zmadu lo ka selplika'e"
"damba" (to be precise, its third argument) is more useful.

That should be "fi lo ka selplika'e".

("lo sumti be fi li ci be'o po zo damba" is a very cumbersome way of
saying "lo sumti be zo damba bei li ci".)

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Posted by arj on Tue 05 of Jun, 2007 21:14 GMT posts: 953

On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 03:45:53PM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Arnt Richard Johansen <arj@nvg.org> wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:05:17PM -0700, xorxes wrote:
> >> "pada .e roda" does not really work for the idiom "one and all".
> >
> >I have replaced the example with another.
>
> ".i zo damba to sa'e lo sumti be fi li ci be'o po zo damba toi cu
> zmadu lo ka selplika'e"
> "damba" (to be precise, its third argument) is more useful.
>
> That should be "fi lo ka selplika'e".
>
> ("lo sumti be fi li ci be'o po zo damba" is a very cumbersome way of
> saying "lo sumti be zo damba bei li ci".)

Groannnn.

Okay, changed it once more.

--
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
P� 1300-tallet kom tersen. F�r og etter det var det meste bare rot, men
s� kom Sch�nberg og ordnet opp. Puh. Endelig litt system. S� klarte Arne
Nordheim � rote det til igjen. — Under Dusken 08/2001