Is munjyne'i ku grammatical?

(See ku if you're looking for a list of the uses of ku.)

(jbofi'e considers it ungrammatical. It's right; I can't find a grammar rule to support the construction <brivla> + ku)

You're right, although - OTOH - there doesn't seem to be a rule explicitly forbidding it ;-) So, again and again, I'm seduced to do it that way.

The functionality of {ku} seems a bit fuzzy to me:

  • It's just that (unusually) it has four different roles as a terminator, unlike most terminators which have only one (kei just terminates abstractions, lo'o just terminates math expressions, etc. etc.). This is a survival from its original Loglan use (in the form of gu) as the only terminator.

So why not use it also with regard to {brivla} i.e. whole sentences/phrases etc. in order to put these parts of speech anywhere in the sentence you'd like to, which is allowed officially for tenses+ku etc. (e.g. in ".i mi xabju le zdani be la turni ze'uku" or ".i puzuvuku ....").
(It cannot be done e.g. by using termsets, since those need sumti)

I'd like to do constructions like e.g. in Turkish: "Türk olarak..." (Being a Turk, I...) or even more complex phrases, which require {brivla}, putting them 'in front' of the whole utterance or 'at the end' or where ever it's preferred to have them. --.aulun.

  • This is a topic/comment sentence: put mi poi kulnr,tirki,ie in the prenex.