Your sentence was not added because the following already exists.
Is {pu} meant to be inside the abstraction?
No. "cu" won't be needed here once the grammar is fixed, but it's needed as things stand now.
doi xorxes, how is the grammar can be fixed? If we omit {cu} then {pu} would be inside the relative clause.
I meant the grammar of the language, not of this sentence. This sentence is now fine with the current grammar.
Yes, I mean the new grammar you are talking about. how is the new grammar can be better? How it'd work?
The current grammar seems so intuitive to me.
Most people find it more intuitive reading an unterminated tag right in front of a selbri as a selbri tag rather than as a sumti tag of a preceding subordinate bridi.
Most people? One can perceive {pu} after brivla as a tense suffix. Like
{mi jdice-pu} = I decide-d.
In {lo nu da'i zo'e lo jetnu cu djuno pu} this might sound reasonable.
Цэтлікі
Паглядзець усе цэтлікіSentence text
License: CC BY 2.0 FRЖурналы
This sentence was initially added as a translation of sentence #1588468
mi va'o lo nu da'i djuno lo jetnu pu jungau do jy
added by xorxes, 5 жніўня 2012 г.
linked by xorxes, 5 жніўня 2012 г.
mi va'o lo nu da'i djuno lo jetnu cu pu jungau do jy
edited by xorxes, 15 жніўня 2012 г.
linked by leowalkling, 28 жніўня 2014 г.
