Re: Some how-do-you-says

["Jorge J. Llambias" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

la markl di'e cusku

> > > 2a  le vrici mamta be la xorxes. je la .and.
> > > ...
> > I don't think that works. In 2a you're describing
> > each of the things as being vrici mamta of both
> > Jorge and And.
>
> Okay, but what is responsible for this unintended
> result?  I assume that {vrici}, altho perhaps
> unhelpful, is not the problem.

Right.

> I assume that {le}
> should be {lei} or {loi}.

Yes, that would work for me, but it is not what And
wants. He wants to be able to say something about each
of the mothers, not about the two as a whole.

> What else needs to be
> changed in order to produce the intended result?

I don't have a complete answer. We need the "and" to
be outside of the description, which I think means
that it has to go in the prenex. So I would say
something like:

        la xorxes e la and zo'u le ri mamta
        For Jorge and And: each of their mothers...

> Should I have used a conjunction other than {je}?

Well, {je} is not really grammatical there, although in
my opinion it should be. {je} should be grammatical
anywhere that {joi} is, because it can't cause any
ambiguity and it is immediately understandable.

> If so, which one?

I thought at first that {.a} would work, and it does
in this special case, only because a mother is something
we all tend to have:

        le mamta be la xorxes a la and
        Each of those that are mother of Jorge or And

but this is not a general solution, because if you change
for example to sister, you would not be saying that both
Jorge and And actually do have at least one sister, which
is part of the claim we want to make.

co'o mi'e xorxes