[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
> {buska} is just an ordinary predicate
It's about as ordinary as djica and nitcu, which IMO are maldefined.
Kalte too. (They should take a du'u or tu'a x2. Since they don't,
we should forget about them and use lujvo replacements for them.)
So, would you say that my definition of {buska} in terms
of {sisku} is not a proper definition? What is it lacking?
How is it maldefined?
As for your identification of {lo'ei broda} with {tu'a lo broda},
that is not quite correct. The proper identification is with
{kair-... tu'a lo broda}, or more precisely with
{kair-... tu'o ka ce'u du lo broda}. In other words, you
cannot eliminate {lo'e} unless you change the predicate.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls!�Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp