Re: ni, jei, perfectionism

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

la lojbab mi spuda di'e
>>{jei} is defined in the refgram both as a truth value, and as an
>>indirect question involving truth values.
>
>I claim that the refgrammar does not define the second.  I will agree that
>Chap 11, 6.3) appears to contain an unmarked sumti-raising which would
require
>a tu'a on the x2 to be ideal.

As well as 11,7.3) and 11,7.6). Indeed in every example in which {jei} is
used in a full bridi.

Also, practically all of the not many times it has been used in actual
texts has been like that.

Maybe that's not by definition, but there are clearly two meanings:
one in theory and a different one in practice.

>(Resolving an apparent inconsistencey between the rst of the section and
>6.3) merely requires that I analyze that the English transaltion given for
>6.3) does indeed reflect a sumtiraising of an indirect question.  Neither
>the translation nor the text discussion indicate that the indirect question
>was supposed to be the meaning of the jei.

The nice thing about holy books is that they're so interpretable... :)

 co'o mi'e xorxes