'Le uso de iste particula interrogative como si illo significarea
simplemente "no" es un error'... crassissime!

On 30 November 2015 at 14:37, Ferdinand Cesarano <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 30 November 2015 at 03:38, Ruud Harmsen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Nonne, io manca de moneta.  Io manca.
> >>>>
> >>> Thomas Alexander <[log in to unmask]>:
> >
> >>  I seem to remember discussing your use of "nonne" in this manner.
> >>>  Mark that down as another Mulaikism.
> >>>
> >>
> > 05:29 30-11-2015, Stanley Mulaik:
> >
> >> E tu non ha Thomasismos?  Remarcabile!
> >>
> >> Vide le IED a 'nonne' e [nonne]. Illo es un particula interrogative.
> >>
> >
> > [non-ne?] {interr part} is it not?; il es ver, nonne? it is true, is'nt
> > it?, isn't that so?
> >
> > Mais a cata interrogative, il ha un echo negative: nonne? nonne!
> >>
> >
> > Nonne? No!
> > Nonne? Si!
> >
> > 'Nonne' pro me es un contraction de 'non es'. 'Não é' in portugese es
> > usate in le mesme maniera. Sempre al fin del phrase, non in le initio.
> >
> >
> Exacto!  Le parola "nonne" es lo que on nomina in anglese le "tag
> question".  Illo debe esser usate ubi on usa in anglese "isn't it?",
> "aren't you?", "don't we?", etc. (o ubi le Cockneys dice "innit?").
>
> "Ille va visitar me, nonne?" = "He is going to visit me, isn't he?"
> "Nos ha bastante de moneta, nonne?" = "We have enough money, haven't we?" o
> "...don't we?"
> "Tu lo ha viste, nonne?" = "You saw it, didn't you?"
>
> ...etc.
>
> Le uso de iste particula interrogative como si illo significarea
> simplemente "no" es un error.
>
>
> Ferdinand
>
>
> --
> Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
> http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html
>



-- 
_________________
www.interlingua.com


--
Pro leger le archivos e pro modificar o cancellar le subscription:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/interlng.html