[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> You suggest there is a difference between:
>
> > > > la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> > > > la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo nanmu
>
> I claim they are both the same: the first one in your
> interpretation.
>
> Xod also thinks they are both the same, but he thinks
> they correspond to the second one in your interpretation.
The CLL is totally tacit on the difference between these 2. I accept the
points made about su'oda and roda, they are very interesting and I shall
be thinking more about this. But in the section on sumti ordering, no hint
is given concerning the order of implicitly quantified sumti. Furthermore,
the relationship between explicitly-quantified sumti and sumtcita terms
has never been explored. So while I may be wrong, and am open to learning
more about this, I think it's disingenuous to claim that it actively
violates the CLL.
> You give relevant scope to both {ze'a} and {lo}.
> I only give relevant scope to {lo} and take {ze'a} as
> a singular term. Xod gives relevant scope to neither
> of them. His interpretation (against CLL) matches my
> original {la djan cu darxi lo'ei nanmu ze'a le jeftu}.
--
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."