10. selbri based on sumti: “me”

The following cmavo are discussed in this section:

     me      ME                  changes sumti to simple selbri
     me'u    MEhU                terminator for “me”

A sumti can be made into a simple selbri by preceding it with “me” (of selma'o ME) and following it with the elidable terminator “me'u” (of selma'o MEhU). This makes a selbri with the place structure

             x1 is one of the referents of “[the sumti]”
which is true of the thing, or things, that are the referents of the sumti, and not of anything else. For example, consider the sumti
10.1)  le ci nolraitru
       the three noblest-governors
       the three kings
If these are understood to be the Three Kings of Christian tradition, who arrive every year on January 6, then we may say:
10.2)  la BALtazar. cu me le ci nolraitru
       Balthazar is one-of-the-referents-of “the three kings”.
       Balthazar is one of the three kings.
and likewise
10.3)  la kaspar. cu me le ci nolraitru
       Caspar is one of the three kings.
10.4)  la melxi,or. cu me le ci nolraitru
       Melchior is one of the three kings.
If the sumti refers to a single object, then the effect of “me” is much like that of “du”:
10.5)  do du la djan.
       You are-identical-with the-one-called “John”.
       You are John.
means the same as
10.6)  do me la djan.
       You are-the-referent-of “the-one-called ‘John’”.
       You are John.

It is common to use “me” selbri, especially those based on name sumti using “la”, as seltau. For example:

10.7)  ta me lai kraislr. [me'u] karce
       That (is-a-referent of “the-mass-called ‘Chrysler’”) car.
       That is a Chrysler car.

The elidable terminator “me'u” can usually be omitted. It is absolutely required only if the “me” selbri is being used in an indefinite description (a type of sumti explained in Chapter 6), and if the indefinite description is followed by a relative clause (explained in Chapter 8) or a sumti logical connective (explained in Chapter 14). Without a “me'u”, the relative clause or logical connective would appear to belong to the sumti embedded in the “me” expression. Here is a contrasting pair of sentences:

10.8)  re me le ci nolraitru .e la djan. [me'u] cu blabi
       Two of the group “the three kings and John” are white.

10.9)  re me le ci nolraitru me'u .e la djan. cu blabi
       Two of the three kings, and John, are white.
In Example 10.8 the “me” selbri covers the three kings plus John, and the indefinite description picks out two of them that are said to be white: we cannot say which two. In Example 10.9, though, the “me” selbri covers only the three kings: two of them are said to be white, and so is John.

Finally, here is another example requiring “me'u”:

10.10) ta me la'e le se cusku be do me'u cukta
       That is-a-(what-you-said) type of book.
       That is the kind of book you were talking about.

There are other sentences where either “me'u” or some other elidable terminator must be expressed:

10.11) le me le ci nolraitru [ku] me'u nunsalci
       the (the three kings) type-of-event-of-celebrating
       the Three Kings celebration
requires either “ku” or “me'u” to be explicit, and (as with “be'o” in Section 7) the “me'u” leaves no doubt which cmavo it is paired with.