On Friday 18 September 2009 11:04:05 Ryan Leach wrote: > ki'e .pier. > > I have developed a tendency to mix up tricu and troci, and noticed it > as soon as you pointed it out.
As long as you don't try to bark up the wrong tree. > If I understand you correctly, then in order to indicate possession, I > must include both the "le" and the "mi"- as in "mi batci le mi gerku". > I thought that the 'le' was elidable- I appreciate the correction. Correct. You can also: *use a sumti made with an article as possessor: "lo le cipni ku zdani" *indicate inalienable or alienable possession with "po'e", "po", "pe", or "ne": "le denci po mi". This can be useful if a paleontologist with an implant is in a group of paleontologists examining prehistoric teeth. > Also, I looked up ra'o in jbovlaste and am not certain that I > understand it. What exactly is a 'pro-assignment context update'? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ra'o Pierre
