Re: Indirect questions

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

And:
>I don't see that xu kau is deictic at all. "She wondered whether
>he was hungry" does not vary in meaning according to when and where
>who says it to who.

But "She knew whether he was hungry" means something if he was
hungry and something else if he wasn't.

Our methods of expansion seem not to work for "She wondered
whether he was hungry". What's going on here?

>I predict that if this is left to ordinary usage, words like
>"bacru" and "zo" (and many many others) will become homonymous.

Probably, but we should at least try to avoid that.

>> But {selvlagau} would only work for single words.
 >
>How come? Where does the restriction to single words come from?

Is not the x1 of valsi a single word? Then {ro jufra cu valsi}?

>"pa valsi" is a single word, but "valsi" doesn't mean "is a
>single word".

If {lu mi klama le zarci li'u cu valsi} then {pa valsi} could
be {lu mi klama le zarci li'u}, I think.

>After all, {lei ci valsi cu valsi} is sensical,
>isn't it?

I'd say no. {lei ci valsi cu valsi gunma} if you like.
I'm not sure, but it seems that you could run into
inconsistencies if {lei ci valsi cu valsi}. How would
you define something that is a valsi?

co'o mi'e xorxes