ke e se

Karo lekto-pe,

U verba KE habe per cefa mode u gramatika funktio, idio pro plu-la lingua; qi habe nuli tali verba. Un idea de KE es; id monstra; un holo frase es in loka de mo nima-verba.

EN: The word KE has mainly a grammatical function, especially for those languages which do not have such a word. The idea of KE es to show an entire sentence is taking the place of a noun phrase.

Un idea de Glosa es tena pusi u doci de gramatika. Si pe nece sto u disci de plu Glosa verba te dice explika de uti de KE, pe face lento u disci de Glosa. Ka-co mi ma amo; Glosa ne uti KE–alo id uti gene tena solo akorda volu.

EN: The idea of Glosa is to keep the teaching of grammar to a minimum. If you need to stop learning Glosa words in order to explain the use of KE, you are slowing the learning of Glosa. So I prefer Glosa should not use KE–or its use be kept optional.

Si pe volu dice u disputa; pe nece dice explika plus de uti de “;” in loka de KE: Mi este akorda. Pe ne nece “;” alo klu “,”. Anti-co mi plus nece indika; pe ne pote detekti “;” in audi u ge-loqi frase–e mi amo u-ci ma de panto hetero ra.

EN: If you want to argue you also need to explain the use of “;” in place of KE, I agree. Neither “;” or even “,” are necessary. However, I need to point out also that “;” cannot be heard in the spoken sentence–and I like this most of all.

Pe pote dice un idea de KE per plu verba; qi es komune in panto hetero lingua:

EN: The idea of KE can be expressed with words that are common to all other languages:

–An dice KE fe pa gene plu flori nuli-kron. –An dice; fe pa gene plu flori nuli-kron. –An dice u-ci (ra): fe pa gene plu flori nuli-kron. –An dice u frase: fe pa gene plu flori nuli-kron.

Mi kredi; Manuel pa grafo korekti un uti de SE e AUTO. U ra; qi es no-klari a mi, es; qe pe uti u-ci plus pro persona-mo e persona-bi. Mi auto uti u-ci pro mu.

EN: I believe that Manuel has correctly written the use of SE and AUTO. Something not clear to me is whether this should be used for first and second person. I use this this way myself.

De “attributive” (Hogben pa uti u nima “amplifier”): Klari es nece ci a-nu. Hogben volu id po akti-verba. Anti-co mi pa gene nota; in plu bibli 18 Gradu e Centra Glosa, u-ci es akorda England lingua, po buta-verba. Mi pa detekti; un hetero regula de Hogben es funktio ci: Moti u ma longi ra a fini:

EN: About the “attributive” (English “appositive”; Hogben used the term “amplifier”): Clarification is still needed here. Hogben wanted it after the verb. However, I have noticed in the books 18 Steps and Central Glosa that this is done as in English: after the object. I have found another rule of Hogben’s to be useful here: Put the longer phrase towards the end:

–Fe pa doxo boni un andro. EN: She had thought the man good. –Fe pa doxo un andro un auxi-pe; qi es la panto-kron. EN: She had thought the man a helper who was always there.

Mi ne doxo no-gramatika “gru-co”!

EN: I don’t think “gru-co” es ungrammatical!

Saluta, _ _ /. Gary #/# ###

The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!