On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Michael Turniansky
<mturnian...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Pierre Abbat <p...@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday 17 September 2009 14:35:55 Ryan Leach wrote:
>> > lu mi pu tirna da'e ra'i da'e goi mi pa'upatfu .ije mi pa'upatfu go'e
>> > .ije do'i rapli nu so'i pano nanca .i
>>
>> I was stumped by the first sentence, but it parses. It means "«I heard it
>> (which is something I'll say later) from it (which is something I'll say
>> later) which is I» is a father with a component".
>
> Actually, it doesn't parse. "mi pu tirna da'e ra'i da'e goi mi
> pa'u" is fine, but "patfu" is an illegal second selbri in the main
> sentence. "tirna" is the selbri.
"li'u" should't be elidable, but officially it is, so it does parse.
("toi" and "tu'u", the other text enclosers, also should not be elidable.)
> In addition, since you want help
> with "learning", not a learner", it's an event abstraction, "lo nu
> cilre", so the first sentence is
> pe'u ko [cu] sidju mi lo nu cilre
"pe'u do'u ko", or just ".e'o ko"
"pe'u ko" is grammatical, but probably not what was intended.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
