[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 02:19:13AM -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
[...]
> da persists for a while. If da expired after a single bridi, there would
> have been no need for da'o. Plus, it would make it virtually useless. So
> da can be narrowed down with successive claims, whereas, I agree with you
> on the slipperiness of lo, in contrast.
Huh? da'o is for ko'a and broda and such things. "da" is not like
normal pro-sumti, it's got completely different uses and purposes.
The binding "da", according to the book, must end at the end of a
sentence. The book has a provision which says that in "informal
speech" or something the rule is more fuzzy, and a da might be
able to last for another bridi or two. But I think this rule
sucks, and it's highly confusing when people try to use it (which
i've never seen).
If you want a "da" to keep it's referent across seperate sentences,
just put them into one sentence:
da klama .i da sipna
Something comes. Something (else?) sleeps.
da klama .ibo da sipna
Something comes and it sleeps.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binTIYSXyvsIC.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped