Subject: Re: [lojban] More adventures of Max the Dog... pro-bridi, brevity, and tone

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 14:04:39 EDT

In a message dated 5/9/00 5:50:01 PM CST, [email-masked] writes:

<< So, more fun with Max.

English:

Max the dog loves to go for walks.

Big walks or little walks.

Long walks or short walks.

Walks to the park, or walks around the block.

Max loves walks.

This being a highly informal English, I'd think that the lojban
translation would be sticky, and so it appears to be. One thought I had
was to use pro-bridi.

la maks. poi gerku cu se pluka lo mu'e cadzu cei broda>>
I think the {cei broda} breaks things up toward more complex structure; why 
not use the afterthought GOhA

<<.i broda lo mu'e ze'i cadzu
.i broda lo mu'e ze'a cadzu
.i broda lo mu'e ze'u cadzu

.i broda lo mu'e ve'i cadzu
.i broda lo mu'e ve'a cadzu
.i broda lo mu'e ve'u cadzu

.i broda lo mu'e vi vi'a cadzu la xabji
.i broda lo mu'e vu vi'i cadzu la panka

.i la maks. broda

This is of course repetitive as all get out. >>
Repetition is good in a children's book; in fact, it practically defines the 
genre (I will not eat in a car, I will not eat on a star, ...)
Incidentally, I find the combination of point events with time intervals odd 
at least (but probably not contradictory). {zu'o} still seems more natural.

<<But when using "broda", how does one distinguish between *replacement*
of a sumti, and addition of a sumti? I.e., when I say:

.i broda lo mu'e ze'i cadzu

did I mean:

la maks. poi gerku cu se pluka lo mu'e cadzu lo mu'e ze'i cadzu

Max the dog likes to go for walks, under conditions of short walks. (Max
likes to go for walks, so long as they are short.

or did I mean:

la maks. poi gerku cu se pluka lo mu'e ze'i cadzu

Max the dog likes to go for short walks. (conditions unspecified).

Is the sumti following "broda" a replacement for x2? Or a new x3? And
how about with la xabji and la panka? How do those group? I suppose they
need grouping cmavo.....>>
Replacement, according to the examples in the book (which are all, 
admittedly, for x1 for is explicitly generalized)

<<Note, too, the three categories compared to the english two - it seemed
more "lojbanic" to use lojban's concept of small-medium-large built into
tenses than to stick with the literal English adjectives (which, like
much of English, are very dualistic - one or the other).>>
Inevitable and good pedagogy

<<So let's use some logical connectives among the tenses.

la maks. poi gerku cu se pluka lo mu'e cadzu cei broda

.i broda lo mu'e ze'i ja ze'a ja ze'u cadzu
.i broda lo mu'e ve'i ja ve'a ja ve'u cadzu

It seems however, that you can't get rid of the repetition of "lo mu'e"
and "cadzu". Am I right? Or did I miss something? Is there some kind of
"pro-cmavo" for "broda" where you mark what will be substituted or what
you are substituting?

More later.... >>
The conjoined tenses seem cluttered to me -- too much packed too tight, 
repetition is better in a kids' book:
{i go'e le zu'o ze'i cadzu e le zu'o ze'a cadzu e le zu'o ze'u cadzo} and so 
on (the z's work for me too, and in the next line, the matching ve' V series 
picks up nicely.) Again, the repetition is good, as it is in the English. 
I hope to se the more soon.