Whoops, that parses as .ua (ki'e mi) ... ("thank myself"), doesn't it? How conceited of me. zo'o
On 10/24/07, Penguino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > .ua ki'e mi ca djuno ledu'u terfrica zo cilre zo crebi'o > > On 10/24/07, Jorge Llambías <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > >