[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> la xod cusku di'e
>
> >If that's all we mean, then makau is just like ko'a if we ease up a bit on
> >the demand that every ko'a must be assigned with goi, and allow them to be
> >assigned operationally. Which is not a bad idea!
>
> But ko'a has a fixed referent. Consider for example:
> {ro da pu jdice le du'u makau ba kansa da le nu dansu},
> "everybody decided who would accompany them to the dance".
> There is no fixed value ko'a that will serve for everyone
> there. If we use {ko'a} we'd be saying that everyone decided
> to go with the same person.
This makes sense with ko'a, but why are the quantifications of makau and
ko'a different?
But even with this caveat, da can take its meaning from position or from
specification with poi; I see no elegant reason why ko'a can't have the
same flexibility. The only inherent difference I see between da and ko'a
is the assertion of existence.
--
jipno se kerlo
re mei re mei degji kakne