User:Tk1@

From Lojban
Jump to: navigation, search

OK, so I (http://bicoherent.topcities.com/, mirror, e-mail) decided to set up a wiki page...

I'm the culprit responsible for a Manchu orthography, and a Lojban Ideography [roposal.

As for the Lojban language itself, I'm still a greenhorn. As part of my learning, I'm trying to translate a helpful tip on how to be evil (corrected with the help of xorxes and others, but as I later made some of my own amendments, there may still be errors):

  • i lo'e lijda ctuca cu te smuni le ka palci lo makfa bapli poi gunka le nu fapro le cevni vau le nu le remna cu to'e curve binxo i lo'e na lijda remna bo se tadni krici cu te smuni le ka palci le ro seltra poi da se snada cu zenba fi'o jdima le nu le na'e bo da se snada cu jdika i je mi te smuni le ka palci kei le mi se pluka poi mi zgana le nu so'i na zekri cu terpa na cando ku'o fi'o temci le nu ge mi zalvi ro ra se krici dirba jicmu gi mi gunka fi le nu mi mulno jitro ro jmive i le ka palci na se ciste krici i ri genai se zukte ginai te zukte i ri ge menli tarti gi jmive morna i ko cusku no krinu i ko sarji no ciste krici i ko no da ciksi i do palci i ko frili gasnu

vie-evil.gif

Another translation attempt: original) - Don't know whether or not this is a page of yours - yet, one should determine the language in the header, since it's pretty cumbersome to find out the encoding (which infact is GB!). Also, it's a bit hard to read against this background :( -- olung - no, alas the page's not mine -- User:tk1@

  • no'i · lu su'o blabi xirma cu na xirma li'u · cumki xu °
  • no'i · go'i °
  • no'i · ki'u ma °
  • no'i · zo .xirma. sinxa lo tarmi ° i zo .blabi. sinxa lo skari ° i no sinxa be lo tarmi cu sinxa lo skari vau ° i ja'o · su'o blabi xirma cu na xirma °
  • no'i · ganai su'o zo'u blabi xirma gi na xusra le du'u no zo'u xirma kei ° i ganai na xusra le du'u no zo'u xirma kei gi ro blabi xirma cu xirma xu ° i ganai su'o zo'u blabi xirma gi su'o zo'u xirma · i su'o blabi cu na xirma ki'u ma °
  • no'i · ganai cpedu su'o xirma · gi lo pelxu ja xekri xirma cu mansa ° i ganai cpedu su'o blabi xirma · gi lo pelxu ja xekri xirma cu na mansa ° i ganai ro blabi xirma cu xirma · gi le pamoi cpedu le remoi cpedu cu mintu vau ° i ganai cpedu mintu · gi ro blabi cu na drata lo xirma ° i ganai le se cpedu cu na drata · gi lo pelxu ja xekri xirma cu ga mansa gi na mansa ° i paunai cumki xu ° i le mansa fa'u le na mansa cu · natfe simxu · i di'u klina ° i ja'o pa pelxu ja xekri xirma cu · mansa lu su'o zo'u xirma li'u · gi'e na mansa lu su'o zo'u blabi xirma li'u ° i lu su'o blabi xirma cu na xirma li'u · se jarco roroi °
    • fa'u needs to become kufa'u, and your su'o zo'us don't sound right, either... you might mean su'o da zo'u da, but my Lojban and my logic aren't enough to be sure. Also, your nas in the prenex sentences should probably be nakus. --mi'e la .filip.
      • Agreed, su'o zo'u is a bit bogus, but I didn't feel like writing su'o da zo'u da xirma or zasti fa su'o xirma. I corrected na -> na ku. fa'u -> kufa'u seems to be due to parser silliness, but since the parser currently doesn't run, I guess I'll just leave it as is...
        • Well, about the "parser silliness"... the parser does what the language tells it to. We (mi'a) have had this before :). See kujoi and/or frigging terminator ku. Result: both of {le mansa fa'u na'e mansa} and {le mansa kufa'u le na'e mansa} are grammatical, while *{le mansa fa'u le na'e mansa} is not; the parser is expecting another brivla after {fa'u} and complains about the {le}. --mi'e la .filip.
          • No, I mean it really doesn't run... John Cowan hasn't released a new parser since I last reported 3.0.00 as failing to compile -- which means the Lojban language definition is pretty much in limbo. (And any other parser will be automatically deemed "unofficial" even before it's written. Something should really be done about the situation, but I don't know what.) -- User:tk1@
    • All your genais should be ganai. I don't understand Chinese, but is ro a good translation here? I think lo'e blabi xirma na du lo'e xirma would be much more persuasive in Lojban. "Ask for a white horse" is cpedu lo'e blabi xirma, not cpedu ro blabi xirma. I suggest: zo xirma sinxa lo tarmi i zo blabi sinxa lo skari i no sinxa be lo tarmi cu sinxa lo skari i ja'o lo'e blabi xirma na du lo'e xirma --mi'e xorxes
      • genai -> ganai: argh! My bad. ro: the original is actually just white horse(s) (is/are) non horse(s), which can be taken several ways. And to me it's more fun to use ro because it gives the argument a bogus air of rigour. But cpedu lo/ro is clearly wrong, so I've fixed it to cpedu su'o.
    • I know this is not the place to argue Chinese philosophy, but the {ro} does pretty well kill all of the standard readings of White Horse No Horse, saying only that some are not, not that ..., well, whatever you think the original was meant to say. Note that {blabi xirma} itself is almost a ambiguous as the Chinese original, though not in the same way as required by some readings. Making an argument of it kills several versions of the joke -- including the one that comes most naturally for the examples given. pc
      • We should find some other place to argue philosophy. :-) If you ask me, this isn't the place to stash translations either... but well.ro: OK! OK! Changed to su'o. Any good alternatives to blabi xirma? xirma poi blabi kei or blabi poi xirma kei are a bit of a mouthful, and labxi'a seems weird. (In the meantime, s/ na ku su'o / no /g...) -- User:tk1@
        • {blabi xirma} is just about right for the original, the other choices are less ambiguous, cutting off some readings. And it is (I think) the natural way to say "white horse" in the usual sense, which is what the paradoxical sound depends upon.
      • (update) changed use of srana and sinxa and other things as per xorxes' suggestion; sinxa is actually closer to the original -- User:tk1@

  • this space reserved for questions and random chitter-chatter *

OK, isn't what is being corrected here xe fanva, not fanva? well, yes, the fanva gets corrected too (or even first) and he then corrects the xe fanva, but still... pc

  • (

Here's a criticism of this kind of Chinese philosophy (Mohists/Sophists) that, BTW, I do not appreciate that much (although rooted in the special character of ancient Chinese language):

[1]

IMO, xorxes' translation is adequate (yan ma=zo xirma etc.) -- olung

  • Well, Sophism doesn't seem to me like a `friend' of Mohism, it's more like an oblique criticism of it. Then again, the question of whether language can and should be used to control behaviour is still open even today; but that's another long discussion... -- User:tk1@