drata lisri fi'eka'u la .AISopos

["Mark E. Shoulson" <cbmvax!uunet!CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!shoulson>]

Um, I have a question with something Nick did in his translation.  I'm not
positive about either point of view.  Consider the first sentence of the
first fable (not counting its title):

.i lo lorxu noi xagji ku'o ca lenu viska loi vanyjba noi dandu lo tricu cu
djica lenu cpacu ra gi'e naka'e cpacu

I dunno.  It looks to me like maybe those "noi"s should be "poi"s.  After
all, you use "lo lorxu", just "something-that-really is-a-fox".  If you
meant a specific one, namely, one that incidentally was hungry, shouldn't
you have said "le lorxu"?  But since you are now adding restrictions about
which fox, i.e. one that was hungry, ought not the specifier be "poi"?
Similarly with "loi vanyjba noi dandu".  You're being specifying here; not
all grape clusters are hanging, but theese are.  And incidentally, is there
an advantage to using "naka'e" here instead of "ka'enai"?  Is there a
difference? (I made the mistake of re-reading the negation paper today and
almost fried my mental circuitry.)

Just a random thought.

~mark