Re: Indirect questions

[JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

cu'u la lojbab

>le skami certu cu danfu lenu le skamu cu broda
>
>If the problem is an event, then the solution can be a thing or an event or
>a person.  There may be an embedded sumti-raising here, but I'll admit that
>I am not sure that you need a specific event to necessarily specify a
>solution to a problem that is somewhat non-specific.

If  specificity is the problem and broda is non-specific, why not then:
{le nu le skami certu cu brode cu danfu le nu le skami cu broda}?

But I don't think {broda} is for that. I would prefer: {le nu le skami certu
cu co'e cu danfu le nu le skami cu co'e}

>lenu lemi bersa cu vimcybevri le festi cu danfu lu ma bazi vimcu le festi
li'u
>My son removing the garbage is an answer to "Who is going to (right now)
>remove the garbage?"

I prefer le danfu and le se danfu at least to be of the same argument type.

>I can imagine mi terspuda le fonxa easily

How can you be a reply to a telephone? Who gives you as a reply to
the telephone? What does that mean?

 >On has to be a bit metaphorical to say that a person is an answer to a
problem
>that is only described as "the phone".

Indeed. It sounds crazy to me.

co'o mi'e xorxes