From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Wed Mar 26 08:08:25 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_5); 26 Mar 2003 16:08:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 35892 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2003 16:08:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Mar 2003 16:08:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n28.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.84) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2003 16:08:24 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.130] by n28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Mar 2003 16:07:45 -0000 Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:07:44 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Alice proofreading Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004801c2f3a8$74a8f3c0$b09eb280@ic.intranet.epfl.ch> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2203 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "jjllambias2000" X-Originating-IP: 200.49.74.2 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=142311107 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la greg cusku di'e > > {kabri vasru}? I don't particularly like {kabri tanxe} either, > > but I can't find anything better. > > No, call it a kitchen container but not a cup container/box. a cupboard is > not better identified by having cups Maybe {bimdadyta'e}, {bitmu dandu tanxe}? Or just {bimta'e}? > i di'a co'e > > {le se vorme noi traji le ka melbi lei purdi} this is missing the kei after > melbi Right. > {le nu denpa fi le cmalu vorme} wouldn't a tu'a be appropriate here? Ok. > {gi'e xadba pacna le nu facki} I can't help but feel that lojban's less > "English" devices should be used here {50% pacna} or something similar What's the difference between xadba and 50%? Maybe {milxe} instead of {xadba}, but I'm not sure {xadba} is wrong. > {i xamgu fa le nu cusku lu ko mi pinxe li'u} I suppose this should be "It's > all very well saying "drink me!", but..." some statement of > insatisfaction/annoyance/irony should be added or used to replace xamgu "o'ocu'i"? > ?s/{lei sampu jivni}/{lei sampu jinvi}/ Actually, {lei samu javni}. > this sumti is then {no'u}d to other sumti which are {le nu co'e}s. Can a lei > be semantically no'ud to le? In general, yes: {lei stagi ku no'u le salta}: The vegetables, which constitute the salad. In this particular case, it does seem wrong. I think it should be {lo'e sampu javni}. > {[lenu pinxe le vindu] cu li'o fanza da} Surely it does more than > annoy/irritate ? "[...] it is almost certain to disagree with you, sooner or later". > In describing the taste as a mixture of things, shouldn't these be "lo'e" Yes. > why {grutrxananase} but {rutrceraso} what does the latter mean by the way? Typo. {grutrceraso} is "cherry". > {i abu ta'e sezystidu lo xamgu mutce} shouldn't this be lo'e? Yes. > remo'o > > I love {za'uzra}, I'd just got ready to point out a mistake when I realised > it was correct. ki'e ui > shouldn't the first {to} have a {sa'a}? Not really, it is a parenthetical remark by the same person (the author) that says the main sentence. {sa'a} is needed when it is the author inserting a comment within one of the characters' speech. i mi do mutce ckire le nu ca'o pinka mu'o mi'e xorxes