Via frazo ne estis aldonita, ĉar ĝi jam ekzistas.
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.
Etikedoj
Vidi ĉiujn etikedojnFrazteksto
Permesilo: CC BY 2.0 FRRegistroj
Tiu ĉi frazo estis komence aldonita kiel traduko de frazo n-ro 1588468
mi va'o lo nu da'i djuno lo jetnu pu jungau do jy
aldonita de xorxes, 2012-aŭgusto-05
ligita de xorxes, 2012-aŭgusto-05
mi va'o lo nu da'i djuno lo jetnu cu pu jungau do jy
modifita de xorxes, 2012-aŭgusto-15
ligita de leowalkling, 2014-aŭgusto-28
