Re: David Young's text

la deivid. cusku di'e

> >.i ko'a goi le nanmu
> >.i ko'e goi le nanmu .ije ko'a do nai ko'e

la nitcion. cusku di'e

> I think you mean {du nai}, which isn't grammatical either: {na du} (the
> reason {du nai} isn't grammatical is that it would introduce an ambiguity:
> mi du .uu nai do = mi du (.uu nai) do; mi (du (.uu) nai) do.

Well, not quite.  "du nai" is forbidden because "nai" is a special purpose
negator; it is used only where it is specifically allowed.  As Nick says,
"na du" does the job here.

Actually, inserting an attitudinal between another cmavo and its following
"nai" always creates an ambiguity, which is resolved in favor of the
attitudinal, thus:

	mi klama le zarci ca ui nai le nu do cadzu le bisli

means

	I go to the store when (unhappily) you dance on the ice.

and not

	I go to the store not when (happily) you dance on the ice.

-- 
John Cowan	cowan@snark.thyrsus.com		...!uunet!cbmvax!snark!cowan
			e'osai ko sarji la lojban.