This section and Section 5.15 contain some example tanru classified into groups based on the type of relationship between the modifying seltau and the modified tertau. All the examples are paralleled by compounds actually observed in various natural languages. In the tables which follow, each group is preceded by a brief explanation of the relationship. The tables themselves contain a tanru, a literal gloss, an indication of the languages which exhibit a compound analogous to this tanru, and (for those tanru with no English parallel) a translation.

Here are the 3-letter abbreviations used for the various languages (it is presumed to be obvious whether a compound is found in English or not, so English is not explicitly noted):

Any lujvo or fu'ivla used in a group are glossed at the end of that group.

The tanru discussed in this section are asymmetrical tanru; that is, ones in which the order of the terms is fundamental to the meaning of the tanru. For example, junla dadysli, or “clock pendulum”, is the kind of pendulum used in a clock, whereas dadysli junla, or “pendulum clock”, is the kind of clock that employs a pendulum. Most tanru are asymmetrical in this sense. Symmetrical tanru are discussed in Section 5.15.

The tertau represents an action, and the seltau then represents the object of that action:

The tertau represents a set, and the seltau the type of the elements contained in that set:

Conversely: the tertau is an element, and the seltau represents a set in which that element is contained. Implicitly, the meaning of the tertau is restricted from its usual general meaning to the specific meaning appropriate for elements in the given set. Note the opposition between zdani linji in the previous group, and linji zdani in this one, which shows why this kind of tanru is called “asymmetrical”.

The seltau specifies an object and the tertau a component or detail of that object; the tanru as a whole refers to the detail, specifying that it is a detail of that whole and not some other.

Conversely: the seltau specifies a characteristic or important detail of the object described by the tertau; objects described by the tanru as a whole are differentiated from other similar objects by this detail.

The tertau specifies a general class of object (a genus), and the seltau specifies a sub-class of that class (a species):

The tertau specifies an object of possession, and the seltau may specify the possessor (the possession may be intrinsic or otherwise). In English, these compounds have an explicit possessive element in them: “lion's mane”, “child's foot”, “noble's cow”.

The tertau specifies a habitat, and the seltau specifies the inhabitant:

The tertau specifies a causative agent, and the seltau specifies the effect of that cause:

Conversely: the tertau specifies an effect, and the seltau specifies its cause.

The tertau specifies an instrument, and the seltau specifies the purpose of that instrument:

More vaguely: the tertau specifies an instrument, and the seltau specifies the object of the purpose for which that instrument is used:

The tertau specifies a product from some source, and the seltau specifies the source of the product:

Conversely: the tertau specifies the source of a product, and the seltau specifies the product:

The tertau specifies an object, and the seltau specifies the material from which the object is made. This case is especially interesting, because the referent of the tertau may normally be made from just one kind of material, which is then overridden in the tanru.

Note: the two senses of blaci kanla can be discriminated as:

The tertau specifies a typical object used to measure a quantity and the seltau specifies something measured. The tanru as a whole refers to a given quantity of the thing being measured. English does not have compounds of this form, as a rule.

The tertau specifies an object with certain implicit properties, and the seltau overrides one of those implicit properties:

The seltau specifies a whole, and the tertau specifies a part which normally is associated with a different whole. The tanru then refers to a part of the seltau which stands in the same relationship to the whole seltau as the tertau stands to its typical whole.

The tertau specifies the producer of a certain product, and the seltau specifies the product. In this way, the tanru as a whole distinguishes its referents from other referents of the tertau which do not produce the product.

The tertau specifies an object, and the seltau specifies another object which has a characteristic property. The tanru as a whole refers to those referents of the tertau which possess the property.

As a particular case (when the property is that of resemblance): the seltau specifies an object which the referent of the tanru resembles.

The seltau specifies a place, and the tertau an object characteristically located in or at that place.

Specifically: the tertau is a place where the seltau is sold or made available to the public.

The seltau specifies the locus of application of the tertau.

The tertau specifies an implement used in the activity denoted by the seltau.

The tertau specifies a protective device against the undesirable features of the referent of the seltau.

The tertau specifies a container characteristically used to hold the referent of the seltau.

The seltau specifies the characteristic time of the event specified by the tertau.

The seltau specifies a source of energy for the referent of the tertau.

Finally, some tanru which don't fall into any of the above categories.

It is clear that “tooth” is being specified, and that “milk” and “eye” act as modifiers. However, the relationship between ladru and denci is something like “tooth which one has when one is drinking milk from one's mother”, a relationship certainly present nowhere except in this particular concept. As for kanla denci, the relationship is not only not present on the surface, it is hardly possible to formulate it at all.