I believe {xu} will work for your purposes. {xu} applies to the previous
word or the construct that that word begins. So when it's used at the
beginning of a sentence it applies to the {.i} and consequently the whole
bridi. But if you were to say {ma'a reroi xu cipygau lo xumymetano} I think
that would be right. At least, I believe it's right with regards to where
the {xu} is. I'm not sure whether {cipygau} means what I want it to and I'm
not sure if {xumymetano} is a valid fu'ivla for "methanol".
More simply "are we going to the store *twice*?" would be {ma'a reroi xu
klama lo zarci} I believe.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Ian Johnson <blindbrav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Today I asked my lab instructor:
> So we're testing with methanol* twice*?
> (The emphasis in text is stronger than it actually is in voice, but you get
> the idea). In other words, I knew we were testing with methanol, was pretty
> sure we were doing it twice, but was not 100% sure about the twice part.
> This intuitively seems somewhat similar to a {ma} question (more so than
> many other English questions), in that you basically state an ordinary
> sentence but are asking someone to fill in a blank. However, you also have a
> guess. This means that if "we're testing with methanol twice" is true, then
> the answer should be "yes" (maybe "yes, twice"), but if "we're testing with
> methanol once" is true then the answer should be "no, once."
>
> Does Lojban have an analogous "fill-in-the-blank or verify that my filling
> is correct" mechanism? If so, how do you use it? My guess was (if there
> isn't a specific mechanism for this) that you would use a combination of a
> connective question and another question word, making a possible structure
> of:
> do <selbri> <x2 sumti> ji ma
> (I can't think of a specific example here for whatever reason, and my
> example above is probably somewhat beyond my level for other reasons).
> Would this work?
>
> mu'omi'e latros.
>
