Talk:lo banli lisri pe mi
broda ba le nu brode
Archived Tiki forum
Archived Tiki forum discussion for lo banli lisri pe mi. Original authors, UTC times, and post IDs are retained below.
lo banli lisri pe mi (Tiki thread #6236)
broda ba le nu brode
lagejyspa · 2007-07-05 18:19 UTC · Tiki post #6237 (reply to #6236)
This would mean that C went via the forest path a short time _after_ s/he saw sand markings. I doubt this was what you meant. If you want to say C saw the markings a short time after going down the path without mucking about with your word order too much, you could use ".i cy. klama fo lo ricfoi pluta .ibazibo cy. viska lo rokci se marxa barna" or ".i bazigi cy. klama fo lo ricfoi pluta gi cy. viska lo rokci se marxa barna" or "bazi lo nu cy. klama fo lo ricfoi pluta kei cy. viska lo rokci se marxa barna"
Also, I might use ".i cy litru lo ricfoi pluta..." rather than "cy klama fo...", simply for ease. Litru is concerned with the route rather than the starting and ending points, as klama is..ije le rokci pe le barna cu kunti jinme
lagejyspa · 2007-07-05 18:35 UTC · Tiki post #6238 (reply to #6236)
la'edi'u cu drata gi'e ku'i na cizra
lagejyspa · 2007-07-06 11:12 UTC · Tiki post #6239 (reply to #6236)
i piso'a loi cmima be so'o le prenu jutsi be'o cu se zdani di'o lo tcadu .
lagejyspa · 2007-07-06 11:27 UTC · Tiki post #6240 (reply to #6236)
2) May I suggest the less wordy: .i so'a le cmima be so'o le prenu jutsi cu xabju lo tcadu (btw, you may want "le so'o" rather than "so'o le" if you are trying to say that most of the members of the several different types of people live in cities/a city, rather than most of the members of many of the types of people live in cities/a city. I'm not sure want your intent was)
3) similiary, in the second sentence following re: "se zdani di'o" => "xabju"Re: i piso'a loi cmima be so'o le prenu jutsi be'o cu se zdani di'o lo tcadu .
lagejyspa · 2007-07-06 11:31 UTC · Tiki post #6241 (reply to #6240)
lo banli lisri pe mi
Anonymous · 2007-07-06 12:39 UTC · Tiki post #6242 (reply to #6236)
> > la'edi'u cu drata gi'e ku'i na cizra > > Author: lagejyspa > > I'm not sure about this, but I think the na negates the entire bridi here, including the first bridi tail (la'edu'u cu drata). You probably want na'e instead.
It negates just the {cizra} bridi. To negate both you'd need {na drata gi'e na cizra}, or equivalently {drata na gi'e nai cizra}.
> Also, "ra" is probably a lot easier to use here than "la'edi'u".
There's a difference, though. {ra} refers to a preceding sumti, {la'e di'u} to the content of the whole preceding utterance. In this case, {la'e di'u} would be the fact that people stand on two legs, have two arms and one head. {ra} could not refer to that fact because no previous sumti referred to it, {ra} could refer to the people, for example.
mu'o mi'e xorxesRe: lo banli lisri pe mi
lagejyspa · 2007-07-06 18:55 UTC · Tiki post #6243 (reply to #6236)
> > Also, "ra" is probably a lot easier to use here than "la'edi'u". > > There's a difference, though. {ra} refers to a preceding sumti, {la'e > di'u} to the > content of the whole preceding utterance. In this case, {la'e di'u} > would be the > fact that people stand on two legs, have two arms and one head. {ra} could > not refer to that fact because no previous sumti referred to it, {ra} > could refer > to the people, for example. >
You're right, of course. I had assumed the author's intent was to refer to the person/people, not the fact. If she intnded to refer to the fact itself, I withdraw my suggestion.
