Re: Beginner question on sumti construction

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

la rik cusku di'e
>Jorge wrote: {le nuzba be le mi nunmorsi cu dukse}
>I thought that the purpose of {be} to avoid putting {ku} at the end of
>the sumti, although it also seemed unnecessary.  But leaving off the
>{be} causes {le nuzba} and {le mi nunmorsi} to parse as separate
>arguments.

Right. You can't drop {be}, whether or not you use {ku}.

 >Is the only way to put arguments into a descriptive sumti to use {be}?

Yes.

>But then, tell me why this parses correctly:
>{i la'a le nu la caryn. ba ctuca loi verba cu zvati le ckule}
>"Probably, Sharon will teach children at a school"

Why would you expect it not to parse? Remember that
nu takes a full bridi after it, so loi verba is not an argument
of the description selbri {nu}, it's an argument of {ctuca},
which is the selbri of a full bridi.

>(my first attempt at a lojban sentence of any worth)
>Yeah, go ahead and correct me on it :-)

No corrections from me this time... :)

co'o mi'e xorxes