[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote:
>
> la xod cusku di'e
>
> > > {mi nelci lo'ei cakla} does not mean that I like the most common
> > > type of chocolate.
> >
> >But you think lo'e does, right?
>
> No, I don't. To me {lo'e} is {lo'ei}. I don't understand why
> you are attributing this notion of associating the mode with
> {lo'e} to me. What did I say that led you to this?
This below. In my understanding, lo would have been just fine in both
cases.
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> I would translate {lo'e remna cu zmadu ti} as "this is
> man-made", and not as "the typical human made this".
> "Humans made this" also works as a translation though,
> but it is not really meant as a property of humans, it
> doesn't really say that humans are such that they made this.
>
> la djan cu darxi lo'e nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> John has been hitting men all week.
--
Henry McCullers, an affable Plano, TX-area anti-Semite, praised the
Jewish people Monday for doing "a bang-up job" running the media.
"This has been such a great year for movies, and the new crop of fall
TV shows looks to be one of the best in years," McCullers said.
"And the cable news channels are doing a terrific job, too. Admittedly,
they're not reporting on the Jewish stranglehold on world finance,
but, hey, that's understandable."