Re: do djica loi ckafi je'i tcati

[Gerald Koenig <jlk@NETCOM.COM>]

Chris Bogart said:


    How to say "I need a box [any-box-whatever]" has been bugging me all day.
************************ deletions
    If "lo tanxe" is the sumti, it is inherently quantified as "there exists
    some thing-which-is-a-box", which isn't what we want, since it's more of a
    hypothetical box.  The kind of box I need may not even exist!
*******************deletions
    Essentially we would be circumventing the ambiguity of wanting "any box" by
    specifying precisely what specific (abstract) thing we DO want, which is the
    property/ability of boxing things up.

     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Chris Bogart
     cbogart@quetzal.com
     ~~~~~~
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
********************************************************************************
 ***************************************************************************
Djer says,
Chris says,
"........[the] specific (abstract) thing we DO want ... is the
property/abilty of boxing things up."


Well, here goes my try:

i. mi nitcu le su'u me le tanxe me'u da kei

What this means to me is:  I need the (in-mind) abstraction  of boxing
up (something that exists).  If you don't want to make "things" existent
you could use zo'e in place of da. If su'u is too nonspecific you could
use ka or nu as you suggested.

I still have a lot of doubt as to what "me" actually does.  By definition
it turns a sumti (here, le tanxe) into a selbri.  But what exactly the
x1 and x2 of the resulting selbri are is unclear to me. In English when
a noun is turned into a verb by the subtraction of an -er suffix, i.e.
"goer--> go", any ordinary subject or object can be used.  Is x1 of "me
le tanxe" a person or machine that boxes things, and is x2 a place for
anything boxed?  In other words, can any appropriate items be used for
the sumti of a selbri created by me conversion?

The bare word tanxe seems to mean is_a_box. "me le tanxe" seems to
mean, or I want it to mean, boxes, as a verb. This is not analogous to
the English example above.  Me did not function as an inversion
operator but rather behaved as an operator which verbalized a "noun"
into a transitive verbal form, as opposed to a simple existence
assertion. Answers, anyone?

djer  jlk@netcom.com