[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la lojbab cusku di'e
This is why I introduced da'a (which BTW I think should be used instead of me'iro, which flashed by my screen in the last couple of days in some context).
Is {da'a} by itself {da'apa} or {da'asu'o}? The latter is
indeed equivalent to {me'iro}.
In fact, da'a converts among all four quantifiers:
da'a ro = no
da'a no = ro
da'a su'o = me'iro
da'a me'iro = su'o
BTW, I was using {da'asu'o} for "not all" before you suggested
using {me'iro}. I now think {me'iro} is a bit better because of
the above table, but they are logically equivalent in any case.
This is where you suggest {me'iro}:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jboske/message/93
Invoking Whorf, if I say that noda poi jelca is in the drum, then that really means NOda, and lighting a match should be safe.
How could you possibly light a match under those conditions? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail