On 10/23/07, John Daigle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> la kan,r cilre fe le zu'o cpare le loldi
>
> It parses on the translator as "Name is/does learning the activity of
> climbing the floors". That seems closer to what I want, but it seems like
> people are avoiding this usage. May I ask what is wrong with it?
{djuno} and {cilre} are defined as knowing/learning some fact x2 about
some subject x3. They are not really appropriate for knowing/learning
how to _do_ something. Not even in the x3, since knowing or learning
how to do something is not at all the same thing as knowing/learning
facts about it.
For knowing/learning how, one can use {certu}/{crebi'o}:
la kanr certu lo nu cpare lo loldi
Connor is adept at crawling on the floor.
Connor knows how to crawl on the floor.
la kanr crebi'o lo nu cpare lo loldi
Connor becomes adept at crawling on the floor.
Connor learns how to crawl on the floor.
> Finally, does my use of binxo make sense to use instead, to indicate the
> internal transformation from one who is unable to crawl to one who is able
> to crawl?
Yes, {la kanr binxo lo cpare be lo loldi} says "Connor becomes a floor-crawler".
mu'o mi'e xorxes
