jan_Lope wrote:janTepanNetaPelin wrote:"sama sina li lon, la ..." = "if your equality is ..."
"sama sina la ..." = "at your equality ..." (but I don't mean that)
"sama sina la ..." = "like you ..."
"tawa sina la ..." = "at your movement ..." (but nobody means that)
"tawa sina la ..." = "to you ..."
toki!
prepositions are at the beginning of a prepositional object. A prepositional object can't be alone. It need an action before.
A la phrase is for a condition:
A la B. = If A then B.
In your example the condition A is incomplete. You don't say what is "like you" or "to you".
"sama sina la ..." = "at your equality ..." I mean exactly this! So you are not right.
"tawa sina la ..." = "at your movement ..." I mean exactly this! So you are not right.
Please see also
https://htmlpreview.github.io/?https:// ... 0000000000
Much clearer and grammatical correct are these sentences. I think this is what you mean. Everybody can understand it.
sina toki e toki pona, kepeken pu. mi toki e toki pona, kepeken pu kin.
toki!
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:The action "mi pu" is accompanied by "sama mi". I could say "mi pu sama sina", "I read the Book like you". But your point is that "sama sina" in "sama sina la" is noun phrase.
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:You could say that, and also "tan sina la" would be "at your cause" instead of "because of you". Stranger things have happened. Our two interpretations would yield - grammars apart - the same sentences. But your interpretation would also allow for a new class of sentences, which I haven't read in the Book, and - perhaps more importantly - neither in your sentences.
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:OK, I didn't see this one coming. But am I "not right"? Let's see, shall we?
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:Your "tawa sina la mi pu" (for example) would be derived from *"mi pu lon tawa sina", and "tan sina la mi pu" would be a variation of *"mi pu lon tan sina". It doesn't end here. If "tawa" and "sama" are nouns and we replace "sina" with "sina mute", we would expect sentences like *"tawa pi sina mute la mi pu" and *"sama pi sina mute la mi pu" (and *"mi pu lon tawa pi sina mute" and *"mi pu lon sama pi sina mute"). Do you mean this as well?
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:P.S.: I see you're using your own grammar in order to make your point. Well played, jan Lope, well played.
jan_Lope wrote:I'm not using my own grammar. I try to use logic to fill the gabs.
pona!
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:I think it would be a nice piece of information for the reader if you could include your findings in your grammar, i.e. that your grammar yields a "lon" in *"mi pu lon tawa sina" and requires a "pi" in *"tawa pi sina mute la mi pu". This would help the reader to make a decision.
jan_Lope wrote:What do you mean with "your grammar"?
Why do you think a "la" phrase requires a "pi"?
pona!
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:"Your grammar." - I mean your lessons and your Toki Pona parser.
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:According to your grammar (i.e. your understanding of Toki Pona's grammar) a sentence can't start with a preposition. Therefore a sentence like "tan seme la sina pu" ("why do you read the Book?") doesn't start with a preposition "tan" but with a noun "tan", and "sina" is its modifier ("at which reason do you read the Book?"). If we take "jan seme" instead of "seme" ("because of whom do you read the Book?") your grammar yields "tan pi jan seme la sina pu?" ("at whose reason do you read the Book?").
This should answer the question why I think that (according to your grammar) (complex) "la"-sentences require a "pi".
mi tawa.
jan_Lope wrote:janTepanNetaPelin wrote:"Your grammar." - I mean your lessons and your Toki Pona parser.
My lessons and Parser are in accordance to the official Toki Pona book.janTepanNetaPelin wrote:According to your grammar (i.e. your understanding of Toki Pona's grammar) a sentence can't start with a preposition. Therefore a sentence like "tan seme la sina pu" ("why do you read the Book?") doesn't start with a preposition "tan" but with a noun "tan", and "sina" is its modifier ("at which reason do you read the Book?"). If we take "jan seme" instead of "seme" ("because of whom do you read the Book?") your grammar yields "tan pi jan seme la sina pu?" ("at whose reason do you read the Book?").
This should answer the question why I think that (according to your grammar) (complex) "la"-sentences require a "pi".
mi tawa.
I can't follow you. "sina" is no modifier here. You can use "pi" accordingly to what you like to say. It is independent from "la".
These discussion is ver off topic. Please use this post: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2659
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest