On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:08 AM, John E. Clifford
<kali9putra@hidden.email> wrote:
No pigs eat oysters. They are too delicate.
na sa xjra le strde ctkake. [le dze] li rlci dkseki.
No pig oysters eats. [Oysters] are an excess of the delicate.
...or:
na sa xjra le strde ctkake. [la dza] li rlci dksaki.
No pig oysters eats. [Pigs] are an excess of the delicate.
A pig came up to a dog. He bit him.
sa xjra se grke klmake. [la dza] [le dze] btcake.
...or:
sa xjra se grke klmake. [le dze] [la dza] btceka.
While working with translating texts may turn up new areas that require work, this one seems to have only recreated the idiosyncrasies of French verb tenses and the inadequacies of natural language anaphoric pronouns.
I don't see how we've recreated anything like that. I think that "dz" would just refer back to whatever was referenced in a previous binding, i.e. sumti, i.e. determiner phrase, i.e. subject or object. The meaning of "dz" would be equivalent to L "ri" / "ra" / "ru", as well as to pro-sumti lerfu ".abu", "by.", etc. I believe that that a device like this will be useful and that people will demand it.
Notice btw the amount of space devoted to trying to fit all of this into a "provisional" phonology and lexicon.