[glosalist] Re: questio de `plu'

Ave, Nick,

Po mi pa grafo mi grama, mi pa trova u reakti a mi qestio. Mi pa trova u reakti in u “Glosa Basic Reference” http://glosa.org/en/gref.htm#Rules in u mero “Nouns, names, idioms, help”.

“U(n)” and “plu” serve primarily as nouns markers when the sense is not otherwise clear. They are not necessary (but are permissible) after a preposition.

–John

nick_hempshall writes:

My view is that otherwise unmarked nouns are taken to be singular in Glosa texts

I’d personally prefer these were undefined as to plurality

Glosa lacks a general noun marker meaning one-or-more, which might well be required before undefined plurality comes to exist as a possibility in the language

— In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “John J Foerch” <mebijohn@…> wrote:

Ave,

Mi ofere pre-kron apologi pro ali ero in mi Glosa.

Mi habe qestio koncerne u verba `plu’.

U plus lingua mi dice es Hanyu, alo gene nima Norma Chinese'. In Hanyu, pleisto nima-verba es gene asume es plurali. Si pe volu specifi solo mo nima-verba, pe volu uti verba homo a mo’ alo u- ci'. Si pe volu emfasi-specifi plurali nima-verba, pe pote uti verba homo plu’ alo `oligo’. Sed usuali, si pe volu specifi plurali, pe ne volu uti plus verba.

Ka-co, mi qestio es: Qe pe panto-tem uti plu' in Glosa por specifi plurali nima-verba, alo qe pe pote omite plu’ kron pe ne volu emfasi-specifi plurali?

Gratia, John Foerch

Yahoo! Groups Links