Talk:le prije ctuca

From Lojban
Jump to: navigation, search

Posted by adamgarrigus on Thu 01 of Feb., 2007 00:13 GMT posts: 92 I had a real hard time with "even" ("... which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams"). My unusual rendering lo'u poi do na ka'e vitke ta'i da ba'e ta'i lo nu senva le'u "which it-is-not-true-that you can visit by-method something {emphasis:} by-method the event-of dreaming" can almost certainly be improved. i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan no'u la'o sy adamgarrigus sy

Score: 0.00 Vote: 1 2 3 4 5 top of page Reply

Edit  Delete  Report this post	

Re: Re: The Prophet: On Children

adamgarrigus Posted by adamgarrigus on Thu 01 of Feb., 2007 06:39 GMT posts: 92 >> I had a real hard time with "even" ("... which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams"). My unusual rendering lo'u poi do na ka'e vitke ta'i da ba'e ta'i lo nu senva le'u

>> "which it-is-not-true-that you can visit by-method something {emphasis:} by-method the event-of dreaming"

>> can almost certainly be improved. i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan no'u la'o sy adamgarrigus sy



> Pierre responds (via mailing list)

> "even" is {ji'acai}. So {do na ka'e vitke ta'i ji'acai lo nu senva} is a try. But that's wrong, because that's the negation of "You can visit it, even by dreaming". If you can visit by any other method, but not by dreaming, {do na ka'e vitke tai ji'acai lo nu senva} is true, but the English is false.


> {do ta'i ji'acai lo nu senva naku ka'e vitke} is the right way. {ka'e vitke} is negated; the rest of the sentence is not.



On further consideration, I think "even", in this case, is not {ji'a cai}. The Prophet is not referring to an additional ineffective method; he's highlighting the method least likely to be ineffective, while still asserting its ineffectiveness. I think this is {mu'a} and/or maybe {do'a nai}.



How such constraining of modals is affected by negation, I don't know. The negation needs to cover the implied unconstrained modal; hence my explicit double modal above. Or is Pierre's solution so obviously correct that I just can't see it? mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan

Score: 0.00 Vote: 1 2 3 4 5 top of page Reply

Edit  Delete  Report this post	

The Prophet: On Children

Posted by PierreAbbat on Thu 03 of May, 2007 17:52 GMT posts: 324 On Wednesday 31 January 2007 19:13, adamgarrigus wrote: > Re: The Prophet: On Children > I had a real hard time with "even" ("... which you cannot visit, not even

> in your dreams"). My unusual rendering lo'u poi do na ka'e vitke ta'i da > ba'e ta'i lo nu senva le'u "which it-is-not-true-that you can visit > by-method something {emphasis:} by-method the event-of dreaming" can almost > certainly be improved. i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan no'u la'o sy adamgarrigus > sy

"even" is {ji'acai}. So {do na ka'e vitke ta'i ji'acai lo nu senva} is a try. But that's wrong, because that's the negation of "You can visit it, even by dreaming". If you can visit by any other method, but not by dreaming, {do na ka'e vitke tai ji'acai lo nu senva} is true, but the English is false.

{do ta'i ji'acai lo nu senva naku ka'e vitke} is the right way. {ka'e vitke} is negated; the rest of the sentence is not.

Pierre


Score: 0.00 Vote: 1 2 3 4 5 top of page Reply

Edit  Delete  Report this post	

The Prophet: On Children

Posted by Anonymous on Thu 03 of May, 2007 17:52 GMT On 2/1/07, adamgarrigus wrote:

> >> ("... which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams"). > > On further consideration, I think "even", in this case, is not {ji'a cai}. The > Prophet is not referring to an additional ineffective method; he's highlighting > the method least likely to be ineffective, while still asserting its > ineffectiveness. I think this is {mu'a} and/or maybe {do'a nai}.

I think the logic is:

You cannot visit it (in any way), (you can)not (visit it) even in your dreams.

so {ji'a sai} does make sense as indicating the most extreme method in addition to any other (not explicitly mentioned).

> How such constraining of modals is affected by negation, I don't know. > The negation needs to cover the implied unconstrained modal; hence > my explicit double modal above. Or is Pierre's solution so obviously > correct that I just can't see it?

The original has two clauses, even though the verb is implicit in the second one. If you want to replicate that you can say something like:

... noi do na ka'e vitke zi'e noi ta'i lo nu senva ji'a sai na ka'e vitke

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Posted by Anonymous on Wed 18 of Jan., 2006 15:29 GMT

> , who was a dawn onto his own day, had waited twelve years > zi'e poi ke'a cerni pe'a ke'a mo'u le pare senanca ku pu denpa

You need the terminator {ku'o} for the poi-clause so that the next term is not part of the clause. Or, to avoid the terminator, put the duration after the selbri (which is even closer to the original: {zi'e poi ke'a cerni pe'a ke'a pu denpa ze'u lo nanca be li pare}. {ze'u} indicates a long duration.

{le pare senanca} is not "twelve years", it is twelve year durations, for example it could be 3, 5, 34, 4, 313, 59, 10, 12, 13, 1, 82 and 7.

> And in the twelfth year, on the seventh day of Ielool, the month > of reaping, he climbed the hill without the city walls > .i mo'u le paremoi nanca .e le zemoi djedi pe la .ielul. noi crepu > masti ku'o ko'a cpare le cmana ze'o le tcadu bitmu lo ka galtu

To me the lojban says that he completed the climbing in the twelfth year, since {mo'u} is a tense for {cpare}. I'd say {ca le paremoi nanca} to indicate when the climbing happened. I would also not use {.e} there: {ca le paremoi nanca ca le zemoi djedi pe la ielul noi ...}

{.e} is distributive, so you are essentially making two statements with it, "he climbed in the twelfth year, and he climbed on the seventh day", which, while not strictly wrong, it sounds odd to me.

> Then the gates of his heart were flung open, >.i ca la'e di'u fe le vorme po'e le ko'a cnise'i cu renro kalri

Why {fe}? I'd also use {be} rather than {po'e}. And something like {suksa karbi'o} for "were flung open".

> And he closed his eyes > .i le ko'a kanla cu mu'e ganlo

{mu'e}? {le ko'a kanla cu ga'orbi'o} or, I think better, {ko'a ga'orgau le kanla}.

> But as he descended the hill, a sadness came upon him, > .i ku'i mo'i ni'a lo nu badri cu cfari

{mo'i ni'a lo nu badri} means something like "moving under a saddness". I'd say something like {ca lo nu ko'a nitcpare le cmana kei}.

> in peace and without sorrow > sekai lo nu panpi secau badri

{panpi secau lo se badri} or {panpi gi'e claxu lo se badri}?

Long were the days of pain I have spent within its walls, and long were the nights of aloneness; and who can depart from his pain and his aloneness without regret? .i so'i se djedi nu mi lo cortu gi'e lemi ka sepli cu nicte go'i gi'e ma kakne cliva le ko'a cortu .e le ko'a ka sepli secau lo xenru

{gi'e} can only connect bridi-tails, it must always be followed by a selbri, not a sumti.

{clani fa lo nuncro djedi poi mi xaksu ne'i lo vi bitmu .i clani fa lo nunynonkansa nicte .i ma kakne lo nu cliva lo nuncro .e lo nunynonkansa secau lo nu xenru}

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Score: 0.00 Vote:
1 2 3 4 5
16px|top of page

adamgarrigusPosted by adamgarrigus on Sat 18 of Feb., 2006 06:51 GMT posts: 92

> .i nu selklama le bloti

1. Start with: { ni'o ni'o pa mo'o } 2. Then: { nu le|lo bloti cu klama } or { nu klama fa lo bloti } or { nunkla lo bloti }

So: { ni'o ni'o pa mo'o nu lo bloti cu klama ni'o la almustafas } ...

i mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan po'u adamgArigus

Posted by adamgarrigus on Tue 31 of Jan., 2006 19:44 GMT posts: 92
At this point there seem to be two places to suggest emendations to the Lojban text of the translation of the Prophet: the discussion pages and Dubious Places. I can't distinguish them & reckon they ought to be consolidated. But if everyone understands this but me, nevermind. mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan