gejyspa wrote:
> First of all, I hate this word. I think it deserves a lujvo, not a
> fu'ivla, but that's neither here nor there. My main complaint is about
> your note. Unless the definition of "adverb" is very different in
Russian
> than in English, I think you are off the mark about what functions as
> adverbs in lojban. fi'o and all the sumtcita I can think of are
> prepositions, not adverbs (although there might be sumtcita that are not.

> Please provide an example) I would also find it very difficult to think
of
> SEI clauses as adverbs. Things that I would class as lojbanic adverbs
> would include some things we normally think of as tenses (e.g. TAhE).

Well, this definition was written long ago based on discussion in IRC.
Looks like indeed it combined everything leading to a mess.

Adverbs are either sumsmi without an argument explicitley filled or tag in
selbri = tag? selbri-1
rule.

By SEI-clauses it was probably meant xoi, not sei.


> But
> the biggest class of all that you have missed is seltau (which, yes, can
> also be thought of as adjectives, because a tertau can be thought of as
> either a noun or verb):
> mi sutra bajra (I quickly run. sutra is an adverb here)

Nope. Totally not. Those are compound verbs in English. Like "drip fry".
It's a common misconception that they are adverbs or adjectives.

Adjectives are what is NOI-clauses and NE-constructs but not seltau.

They are just commonly *translated* as adjectives or adverbs since in
English compound verbs are not that widely used.