we

Kokanu has two forms of negation: using the no particle modifier after other grammar particles and using the we particle before content words. This guide helps explain when to use the latter particle and what it means.

First thing to note is that we forces the immediately following word into modifier form. Secondly, it marks the modifier as being a "reverse", "opposite" or "negated"  form. This allows you to interject some negated modifiers within a larger description and helps ensure sentences don't require constantly returning to either the verb or prepositional forms (using no) when you need to express a mix of positive and negative traits. Let's cover how that works in practice for each content word derivation type.

Verb

When used with a verb, the combined expression means:

  • does not resemble [generic](https://dictionary.kokanu.com/generic?lang=en) object of verb\ makan

  • does not resemble food

  • un-food-like

  • uneaten

  • inedible

Modifier

When used with a modifier, the combined expression means "un[modifier](https://dictionary.kokanu.com/modifier?lang=en)\ konpa

  • unshaking/unvibrating

Noun

This form's most useful meaning is "un-[noun](https://dictionary.kokanu.com/noun?lang=en)\ kun [noun](https://dictionary.kokanu.com/noun?lang=en)\ [noun](https://dictionary.kokanu.com/noun?lang=en)\ meja

  • un-cat-like

le we X

This should always be interpreted as a modifier acting as a verb

le no we

It doesn't interact with no within itself as it is already a negator, though le no we X is technically fine (though redundant) because no acts on le.

le no we makan

  • is not inedible

le we X pon

we does not interact with pon within itself, but le we X pon is fine because we X just acts like a modifier.

le we makan pon je sito

cause the bread to be inedible

le no we makan pon je sito

not cause the bread to be inedible

o no mu no we makan pon

  • don't be a non-en-inedible-er
  • non-en-inedible-er
  • an entity that doesn't cause things to be inedible