Actually, x3 of {cilre} is the subject learned, not the method.On 10/24/07, John Daigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not understanding how "cilre fi lo nu cpare" removes the ambiguity. x1 > is learning by the method of crawling, but it isn't clear what x2 is. In > other words, connor could be learning where things are in the house by > crawling, or learning the difference between carpet and hardwood, or > anything. > > la kan,r. cilre le zu'o cpare le loldi (or lo zu'o cpare le loldi) is just > as bad. Now Connor is learning about the activity of crawling, but what we > want is for connor to learn to be a crawler. > > Maybe > > la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi > > or > > la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi lo zu'o cpare > > captures the idea of aquiring a skill better? > > It seems like an entire book for 3-5 year olds could focus on the verb > "clire", as in "Connor learns by walking. He learns to keep his balance. He > learns about steps. He learns about (etc.) > > On 10/23/07, Wim Coenen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 2007/10/23, John Daigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > In re: 'cilre cpare' > > > > > > If x1 is "learning-crawling" does this imply that x1 is both learning > > > and crawling, with an emphasis on crawling? Could this translate as > > > "practicing crawling"? Or is this tandu just meaningless? > > > > > > > > The place structure of "cilre cpare" is that of the last gismu, "cpare". > > "cilre" modifies the meaning of "cpare", but lojban does not specify how. > > "mi cilre cpare" may mean: > > "I (am learning to) crawl" > > > > But It could also be interpreted as: > > "I crawl (as a demonstration, to teach crawling)". > > > > It is safer to avoid tanru if you don't want to be ambiguous. This is > > why Pierre rewrote your example as " la kan,r. cilre fi lo nu cpare". > > > > mu'o mi'e .uim > > > > > > > > > -- > John Daigle
