spheniscine wrote:
> Unfortunately I don't know Ithkuil, so you're going to have to explain
that
> to me... or perhaps make another cmavo to reflect that meaning.


Just compare mi xusra lo du'u do citka and mi xusra lo du'u go'o i do
citka

Comment #8: Re: Note

Jonathan (Mon Jul 20 06:16:57 2015)

So you want ju'anai for mi na xusra or mi to'e xusra ?

Comment #9: Re: Note gleki (Mon Jul 20 07:25:52 2015) spheniscine wrote: > So you want ju'anai for mi na xusra or mi to'e xusra ? ju'a is not about xusra-ing anything. It's about wrapping clauses into sumti. Comment #10: Re: Note Jonathan (Mon Jul 20 07:47:41 2015) That seems like a complete redefinition of ju'a to me... Comment #11: Re: Note gleki (Mon Jul 20 07:52:31 2015) spheniscine wrote: > That seems like a complete redefinition of ju'a to me... Main level clause must have something like ju'a implied. Comment #12: Re: Note Jonathan (Tue Jul 21 04:44:21 2015) I'm still not sure what you're talking about. If ju'a isn't defined in terms of xusra, what is it defined as? This even conflicts with xorxes' definition for ju'a.