- Home
- Get A Printable Dictionary
- Search Best Words
- Recent Changes
- How You Can Help
- valsi - All
- valsi - Preferred Only
- natlang - All
- natlang - Preferred Only
- Languages
- XML Export
- user Listing
- Report Bugs
- Utilities
- Status
- Help
- Admin Request
- Create Account
|
Discussion of "famyma'o"
|
Comment #1:
Place structure
|
|
Jonathan (Sun May 10 16:22:00 2015)
|
|
Lacks a place for what a famyma'o should end. I think the definition should
be:
x1=c1 is a terminator word for use with class/part-of-speech x2=f2? in
class/part-of-speech x3=c2 in language x4=c3.
It's a nonstandard lujvo place-structure but I believe it is the most
natural, to allow:
zo ku cu famyma'o ma'oi le : "ku" is the terminator for selma'o LE.
|
-
|
Comment #2:
Re: Place structure
|
|
gleki (Sun May 10 18:04:04 2015)
|
|
spheniscine wrote:
> Lacks a place for what a famyma'o should end. I think the definition
should
> be:
> x1=c1 is a terminator word for use with class/part-of-speech x2=f2? in
> class/part-of-speech x3=c2 in language x4=c3.
>
> It's a nonstandard lujvo place-structure but I believe it is the most
> natural, to allow:
>
> zo ku cu famyma'o ma'oi le : "ku" is the terminator for selma'o LE.
Indeed, no need to parallel cmavo here. Since cmavo can be used
additionally.
zo ku famyma'o ma'oi le gi'e cmavo ma'oi ku
However, notice that both tolfamyma'o (like le) and famyma'o are actually
brackets for certain constructs.
so another definition can be
x1 is a famyma'o marking construct x2
zo ku famyma'o lo sumti
i zo le tolfamyma'o lo sumti
We assume here that fanmo refers to the last part of the process, not its
endpoint since sumti indeed contains both lo and ku.
|
-
|
|
|
Comment #3:
please dont change place structure of existing definitions!
|
|
gleki (Sun May 24 08:24:01 2015)
|
|
since it's rather a bug of JVS than a feature please don't change place
structures of existing definitions but add new definitions that can be
voted for or against.
|
-
|
Comment #4:
Re: please dont change place structure of existing definitions!
|
|
Jonathan (Sun May 24 10:56:47 2015)
|
|
gleki wrote:
> since it's rather a bug of JVS than a feature please don't change place
> structures of existing definitions but add new definitions that can be
> voted for or against.
Sorry, I merely changed my mind, since the cmavo2 place isn't very useful
for the concept.
|
-
|
Comment #5:
Re: please dont change place structure of existing definitions!
|
|
gleki (Sun May 24 11:26:38 2015)
|
|
spheniscine wrote:
> gleki wrote:
> > since it's rather a bug of JVS than a feature please don't change place
> > structures of existing definitions but add new definitions that can be
> > voted for or against.
> Sorry, I merely changed my mind, since the cmavo2 place isn't very useful
> for the concept.
Oh, you edited your own definition? That's fine then, .u'u
|
-
|
|
|
|