WikiDiscuss

> || noi | [stuff1] sumti noi ke'a [bridi] ku'o [stuff2] | tu'e
> [stuff1] sumti goi ko'a [stuff2] tu'u .i je ko'a [bridi]

You can't strictly put any bridi there. The general formula would
have sentence-with-ke'a and sentence-with-ko'a-in-place-of-ke'a.
Maybe you meant selbri?

I think we can use {ke'a broda} to represent any-sentence-with-ke'a,
as the generalization is obvious. {ke'a selbri} is slightly more
general than {ke'a broda}, but still not the fully general case.

> poi + ro | ro broda poi brode cu brodi | ro da broda .i je da ga nai brode gi
> brodi
> poi + PA (but not ro or no) | PA broda poi brode cu brodi | PA da broda .i je
> da ge brode gi brodi

A recursive definition, or no definition, is better than one that is wrong.

> goi, both unassigned | ko'a goi ko'e | ko'a du ko'e

I prefer the kansa version, since we can only say something about the
words at this stage. {ko'a du ko'e} is about the referents,
but there are none.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

___
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush