No Subject

[Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!POSTMASTER>]

And:
[re: loi remna cu morsi]
>If lo'i remna is neither male nor female, then this looks like the
>candidate for "Man is immortal".
>If loi remna is both male and female (& I reckon this is so), then this
>is rather iffy for "Man is mortal". "Man is mortal" means the typical person
>('man', to be safe) is mortal. But "loi remna is mortal" means that at least
>some part of loi remna, *but possibly only a single person* is mortal.

Ah, but {morsi} doesn't mean "mortal". It means "dead". At least some part
of loi remna, but possibly only a single person, was/is/will be dead. Let's
accept that {lo ca morsi} is exclusive of {lo ca remna}. In that case, the
proper phrase is {loi remna ba morsi}: in fact, the proper phrase is {ro
remna ba morsi}. But as for "Man is immortal", {loi remna roroi na'e morsi}:
at all times, at least part of the mass of loi remna is not already dead.

Having just endured three lectures on adjuncts vs. complements in Syntax,
I remember our discussion here on whether BAI phrases are still there after
you shut the fridge door, and I am endlessly amused :)

Nick.