Re: Latest version of my kafybarja story

[Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>]

>.i lebi'u remna cu klama mo'ine'i ra
>.i ko'a goi ra zutse ne'a lo jubme

If the referent of this second {ra} is {lebi'u remna}, then the {ra}
should be {ri}, as {rX} anaphora don't refer to other {rX} anaphora.

>.i da poi prenu cu genai pinxe lei ckafi gi pencu le kabri gi'e
>na djica tu'a lei ckafi ki'u loza'i na'e pe'ise'inai glare

Hm. Doesn't the {na} negate the whole clause? "It is not true that (she
wants the coffee because it's not hot enough, quotha)". I'd go either
{na'e} or {gi'enai} to clean up this one. (Bandaid solution, I know.)

>mi lebna lei ckafi gi'e na'o denpa fu'i so'e mentu tezu'e lenu lei ckafi
>cu glaryri'a le kabri kei fo lenu krefu dunda lei naldrata ckafi

Strictly speaking, {tu'a le ckafi}, but I still think the omission of {tu'a}
here acceptable, as communicative.

*******************************************************************************
 A freshman once observed to me:         Nick Nicholas am I, of Melbourne, Oz.
 On the edge of the Rubicon,             nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo)
 men don't go fishing.                   Account expires end of February 1993.
   - Alice Goodman, _Nixon In China_     Mail me! Mail me! Mail me! Or don't!!