On Mar 26, 2019, at 11:03 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

Who said it's ungrammatical?

It looks like you did.

On Mar 24, 2019, at 4:59 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

It's not ungrammatical to elide an 'oH which refers to ngoDvam. However, you never established the antecedent in the first place.

What you're really doing is bIvoqbe' 'ej muSuj 'e'. This is, of course, not allowed.

You also posted something even more full of multiple negatives that I think parses out to “you can say it but it’s illegal.” Are you making some sort of a distinction between “ungrammatical” and “against the rules”?

I said "it's not ungrammatical" to elide a pronoun. Then I said "What you're really doing is" making 'e' a subject, and THAT is not allowed. I did not say bIvoqbe' 'ej muSuj is ungrammatical, only that it has to assume an elided noun like ngoDvam to be grammatical.

Good grief! mayqel asked if there was something wrong about bIvoqbe' 'ej muSuj, because he felt like there was. I was pointing out that his bad feeling probably came from mentally thinking of this as bIvoqbe' 'ej muSuj 'e', which is a sentence that IS ungrammatical, and I said so. I also pointed out that mayqel's actual sentence itself is not actually ungrammatical, because it can be interpreted as something like bIvoqbe' 'ej muSuj nogDvam. I believed this was NOT what mayqel had been thinking, because of his bad feeling about the sentence. I also opined that this sentence was probably not the best way to say this, because there was an elided pronoun without an antecedent, and offered alternatives. This was a stylistic opinion on my part.

I didn't tell anyone his sentence was ungrammatical, against the rules, or illegal. And if you all insist on continuing to find a way to read what I said that way, just take the above paragraph as a revised statement.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name