Place and role — in, dari, por

Taught in Lesson 15, after Lesson 13 found it missing.

Three small words

Each goes before its noun. in turns a noun into a place; dari into a source; por into a recipient or a purpose.

Going somewhere needs nothing

After a verb of motion — go, lai, anda, kimbia — the place that follows is the destination. No word is added:

This has been true since Lesson 2. It is now the rule: a motion verb’s object is where it is going. Chinese does exactly this — wǒ qù shìchǎng, “I go market”.

In

Place words — sini, situ, upar, sub, kiri, yamin — are already places and take no in. Mi sini, never mi in sini.

Dari

Por

por was already in the language, folded inside porke — “for what”, why. Now it stands on its own.

Why giving needs por. Mi beri pan dugu mi would read, by the possession rule, as “I give my sibling’s bread”. por keeps the recipient apart from the owner: Mi beri pan por dugu mi.

With

una means “together”. Put a noun after it and it means “with”:

No new word. una is Latin ūnā — the founder’s word — and in Latin it already meant both “together” and, with cum, “together with”.

Where these phrases go

Place first, then time, both at the end of the sentence.

This settles a question every lesson since 7 had left open: sini, situ, sasa, kab, porke, kaifa all go last, and now the rule says so.

Sources

Three words for at, from and to is the floor. Indonesian has exactly these three (di, dari, ke); so does Turkish (-da, -dan, -a), Arabic (fī, min, ilā), and Toki Pona (lon, tan, tawa). Fewer than three and a language leans on its verbs; Amadunia does that for “to” and no further.

Why prepositions, not suffixes

Amadunia is subject-verb-object with modifiers after the noun. Languages built that way — Indonesian, Swahili, Thai, Vietnamese, Arabic, Spanish — put their place words before the noun, and languages built the other way — Turkish, Japanese, Hindi — put them after. The language follows its own shape.

Why this and not the alternatives

Nearly every short candidate collided:

Open questions

• Whether a time word may open a sentence. The order this page settles puts place first and time after it, both at the end, and grants fronting to one thing only: a subordinate clause, with a comma. Eight sentences front a time word instead, and two of them are lessons:

  Where	Sentence
  Lesson 20	sasa ta hao	now she is well
  Lesson 22	sasa kita go	now we go
  text 16	Besok mi saufa tabak samaki una mama mi	tomorrow I will cook fish with my mother
  text 17	Besok mi saufa go dom mi	tomorrow I will go to my house
  text 20	Sasa mi faham	now I understand
  text 20	Besok mi saufa go skola tena	tomorrow I will go to school again
  text 21	Sasa anak faham	now the child understands
  text 26	Sasa dom itu no es dom mi	now that house is not my house

  Every one of them is a contrast — now, as against before; tomorrow, as against today — and English, Chinese, Indonesian and Turkish all front a time word for exactly that. Nothing here grants it and nothing here forbids it either: the rule says where time goes, not that it may go nowhere else. That is the same silence that covered the imperative until September 3 and a tense marker before an adjective until yesterday.

  Found September 6, 2026 by reducing every sentence in the material to its parts of speech and reading the shapes that occur once — the method that found the four sentences below. The most recent of the eight is text 26, written two days ago, which used the shape without noticing it was not granted. check.py holds the count at eight while the question is open.

• A place word cannot attach to a noun, and cannot take one. sini, situ, upar, sub, kiri, yamin are whole place expressions and go last, so there is no way to say the people here, the soup there, or below the house. Four sentences had been writing those anyway, and this rule’s own page did not notice because the sentences are made entirely of real words:

  Where	Was	Wanted	Now
  definiteness.md	Insan-insan sini hao	the people here are good	Insan-insan hao sini — the people are good here
  text 7	Insan-insan sini hao	the same	the same
  text 4	Corba situ paling hao in madina	the soup there is the best	Corba paling hao in madina
  text 21	Es bage sub dom	a garden below the house	Es bage sub — a garden below

  The first three put a place word in front of the predicate, where the rule above says place goes last. The fourth is the other half of the same gap: it used sub as a preposition, and the language has three prepositions — in, dari, por — none of which means above or below.

  The gloss moved with it. Ponte in sungai was translated “the bridge is over the river” on this rule’s own illustration and in Lesson 24. in is at or in; over has no word. Both now say “at the river”.

  Found September 5, 2026 by counting every adjacent pair of word classes in the repository and reading the rare ones. Nothing in the language was invented to close the gap.

  A fifth sentence, and a different shape. Text 24 tried to say that a house stood on a road near a river, with dekat taking the river after it, and the checker refused the line. dekat is not a place word at all; it is an adjective, so a noun in front of it is described by it and a noun after it has nothing to attach to. The first four sentences wanted a place word to take a noun; this one wanted an adjective to, which the language allows even less. The text now states the road and the river in two sentences and leaves the relation between them to the reader. Found September 6, 2026.

  Every gap this repository has found by writing has been a missing word. This one is a missing slot: in, dari and por are the whole set, and a language that can say a road and a river cannot say one is beside the other. Whether the set should grow is the founder’s call and nothing here proposes a candidate — the ones already rejected are in the table above.

• Existence — settled in copula.md on September 3, 2026: es at the front of a sentence, with no subject, means “there is”.

• Does a time expression take in? The rule above says place first, then time, and stops there — it never says whether “when” carries a preposition. The material has settled into two forms without anyone deciding on one:

  Form	Count	Examples
  in + a bare time-of-day noun	6	Mi kula in pagi · Mi lai in aksam · Mama mi sema masal por mi in rat
  the noun bare, carrying ini, besok or kemarin	20+	rat ini · din ini · besok pagi · kemarin aksam

  Read together they look like one pattern: a time word that points at a particular time stands alone, and a plain one needs in to become “when”. That is a rule nobody wrote, and it may simply be the shape English gave the hand that wrote these sentences. One case does not fit either form — Kita saufa kula una rat, we will eat together at night, where una may be doing the work instead. Deciding this either blesses in for time or takes it out of six sentences.

• With an object, the two jobs of una collide. Alone after a verb it is “together” — Kita kula una — and before a noun it is “with”. Put an object in the sentence and the reading flips: Kita kula una pan is “we eat with bread”, never “we eat the bread together”, so there is no way to say that at all. Found on September 4, 2026 by text 13, which was written for una and had to keep every together sentence free of an object. Whether the answer is a position rule, a second word, or nothing, is open.

• Through, without, about, before, after, near — the second tier of prepositions — are for later. near was asked for again on September 4 by text 12, which could not write the school is near the tree and said the school is on this road instead; dekat is an adjective and putting it in front of a noun would be inventing a preposition. It was found on September 3, 2026: three pages were writing dekat ponte, near the bridge, as though dekat were a preposition. It is an adjective — ponte dekat is “the near bridge” — and the prepositions are in, dari and por, so “near the bridge” has no form. All three were rewritten around it. Text 9 is the first page to want one: Mi anda por tarik, I walk along the road, borrows por for a route, and nothing here grants that. The rule settles direction and location and says nothing about a path.