[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Xod:
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> >
> > la xod cusku di'e
> >
> > > > la djan cu darxi lo'e nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> > > > John has been hitting men all week
> > >
> > >I'm not sure that you care why, but I don't agree with either of these two
> > >uses of lo'e. And I think that the CLL and Standard Lojban is on my side
> >
> > Ok. How would you say it without {lo'e}?
>
> He's hitting real men, and not many of them compared to the number of
> humans around. What is wrong with le?
{le} would invite the question "Which ones?", which is probably
not fully appropriate. But I don't see why {lo nanmu} or {za'u nanmu}
wouldn't work here.
I guess that behind Jorge's question is a point about scope,
and with {lo/za'u} the ordering would need to change to:
la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo/za'u nanmu
"All week it has been the case that there is a man (are men) that
John hits"
--And.