Re: `at least one ' vrs `one or more'

[JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

la erik cusku di'e
>>The best way to get confirmation that it got through is to include
>>in your mail something really controversial so that someone
>>will respond.
>
>zu'o go'i cu nu mi do'o xlura le za'i fengu
>That activity (the previous selbri) is an event of me luring you all
>into an state anger.
>That's trolling.  :)
>
>Dare I ask if that was grammatical?

Almost. You're missing a {le} or some other gadri at the
start of the sentence.

As a matter of style, I prefer to use {nu} rather than {zu'o} or
{za'i}, because I feel that these don't add anything to the
meaning of the sentence and they just complicate it, so
I would suggest: {le nu go'i cu nu mi do'o xlura le nu fengu}.
But this is strictly style, and just my personal peeve. Others
may and certainly do opine differently.

Another point is that if And is right about nu's being things
that happen only, then the x3 of xlura should not take a nu
(or any of its subsidiaries). I think the x3 should be the
property {ka} into which x2 is lured.

Finally, why is {le nu go'i} a {nu xlura} rather than a {ve xlura}?
So I would say: {le nu do setca lo se darlu le do selmri cu
ve xlura mi'o le ka fengu} = "Your including something
controversial in your mail is to lure us into anger."

(Personally, I'm not usually lured into anger by controversies,
though. I rather enjoy them. :)

co'o mi'e xorxes