Re: Beginner question on meaning of "le ... xu ku" and "le ...

[Thanatos <thanatos@DIMENSIONAL.COM>]

From: And Rosta <a.rosta@uclan.ac.uk>


>> le cutci ku xu se citka le mlatu
>>   Is it the shoes which are eaten by the cat?
>
>Yes. That's hardly a beginner's question!


>> le cutci xu ku se citka le mlatu
>>   Is what is being eaten by the cat correctly described as shoes?


>I would translate the second as:
>
>   Is it the shoes that the cat is eating?
>
>- I don't know if you consider that a significant difference from
>your version.


With a simple selbri there isn't any significant meaningful difference,
as the answer will be the same for both.  The second question is
slightly different from the first, and I was trying to capture that
slight difference in English.  However, a more complex description:

  le blanu cutci xu ku se citka
    Is the blue type-of thing being eaten shoes?

  le blanu xu cutci ku se citka
    Are the shoes being eaten blue?

  le blanu cutci ku xu se citka
    Are the blue shoes that which are being eaten?

makes the distinction more obvious.

So I think there is a subtle difference between:

le cutci ku xu se citka
 and
le cutci xu ku se citka

The first is questioning:
xu le cutci ku du le se citka
  Is it true that the shoes are identical with that which is being
eaten.

The second:
le se citka ku cutci xu
  Is it shoes that that which is being eaten are?

The meaning of which I don't think "Is it the shoes that the cat is
eating" captures.

[I'll just go on for those who haven't thought about this, and to
clarify my own thinking]

The first presupposes the existence of {le cutci ku} and {se citka}, and
asks if that fills the x1 place of {se citka}, questioning a sumti.

The second presupposes the existence of the x1 place of {se citka} and
asks if {le cutci ku} is a correct description of it, questioning the
descriptive selbri.

And there's the difference, whether a sumti or a selbri is being
questioned.

For an analogous use of {ma}:

ma se citka
  What is it that is being eaten?

le mo ku se citka
  How is that which is being eaten described?

The first requires a sumti, while the second a selbri.

The exchange:

ma se citka
  ti
ti mo
  cutci

Is equivalent to:

le mo ku se citka
  cutci

(btw, what's the convention for dialogues of this nature?)

And finally:

lu le blanu xu cutci xu ku se citka li'u na mintu lu le blanu cutci ku
xu se citka li'u
.i le go'i cu mintu lu le blanu xu co'e ku se citka .ija le co'e cutci
xu ku go'i li'u
.i le se go'e cu mintu lu xu le se citka cu du le blanu cutci li'u

All this because I was taken by the versatility of {xu}. :)  And it does
require use to fully understand a part of the language.  Now I really
know what it means for {xu} to question the grammatical structure to
which it is attached.  The possible mechanism for expanding multiple
questions to a string of sentences with one question each and the other
questioned places filled with "unspecified" helps make sense of that as
well.

--
Erik W. Cornilsen