Re: beginner's question

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

Robin Turner translates "all women are flowers" as:
>pe'a lo piro ninmu cu xrula po'a

>"Speaking metaphorically, all of those who really are women, are =
flowers"
>(I put the "lo" in to make it clear that it is the "flower" part which =
is
>metaphorical, otherwise it could be read as "those who can be seen
>metaphorically as women, are flowers").=20

Two comments:=20
1) I would use {ro} instead of {piro}.  {piro} talks about the whole of =
a mass, while {ro} talks about the entirety of a list of things.  Since =
you're comparing *each* woman to a flower, and not trying to say that =
the whole of Womankind is like a flower, {ro} is probably better. =20
2) A quantifier after {lo} tells how many of the thing you think there =
are in the entire universe.  Rarely useful.  A monotheist might say {lo =
pa cevni} -- the One (and only) God.  So {lo ro ninmu} is redundant to =
{lo ninmu}.  A quantifier before {lo} tells how many of that set you =
want to refer to in this predicate, which in your case is {ro} -- I'd =
say {ro lo ninmu}, or better yet the shorthand form of that, {ro ninmu}.

>Alternatively:

>lo piro ninmu cu ckaji le nu xrula

>"All of those who really are women have the property I describe as the
>state of being a flower".

I think the x2 of ckaji has to be {leka}, not {lenu}. =20

Your use of {simsa} in a later message solves the problem of metaphor =
nicely. =20

chris