— In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “aristo_pe” aristo_pe@... wrote:

Ka= ro plu Glosa-pe,

Mi habe u qestio abstrakti, posi fatuo:

Tem mi n= u gene sko de Glosa, plu akti-verba frase es klari distingui, anti-co mi h= abe no- facili tem mi lekto plu nima-frase, homo:

plu tri celero fo-= sono rubi vagona

Mi habe u proposi (I have to switch to English now)

The clitics -ci and -la, as found in u-ci and u-la might usefully be u= sed like this:

eqo-ci es maxi boni, eqo-la es homo porko. ‘this hors= e here is great, that horse there is like a pig’.

Now, the advantage o= f this optional usage is that -ci and -la now mark out substantive noun= s. Thus, if the phrase quoted above looked like this:

plu tri celero = fo-sono rubi vagona-ci ‘these three fast loud red cars here’

You wou= ld know to take everything between plu and vagona-ci as modifiers, since t= he clitic marks vagona as the substantive.

Si uno-pe volu skribe ep= i u-ci lista ko u nova gramatika metodi-la, qe an fu gege ge-logi?
Qe = id es u boni idea?

Saluta,

Edmund

Hi Edmund,

Interesting point.= You would have just introduced noun endings… That’s not Glosa how I lea= rnt it! :) But maybe -ci and -la could be applicible to any other part of = speech? I’m not sure.

Regards, Stephan