From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 19 05:30:21 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 05:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HTH0G-0004Ok-Ik for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 05:30:21 -0700 Received: from mclmx2.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.32] ident=[U2FsdGVkX19sG13IZNsJH/w8PhbOQbE1/D2ahrFJgWU=]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HTH07-0004Ob-7B for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 05:30:20 -0700 Received: from 0015-its-ieg02.mail.saic.com ([149.8.64.21] [149.8.64.21]) by mclmx2.mail.saic.com for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:29:51 -0400 Received: from 0015-ITS-EXBH01.us.saic.com ([10.43.229.18]) by 0015-its-ieg02.mail.saic.com (SMSSMTP 4.0.5.66) with SMTP id M2007031907295128075 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 07:29:51 -0500 Received: from 0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com ([10.75.0.188]) by 0015-ITS-EXBH01.us.saic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:29:33 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Debug my propaganda? Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:29:33 -0400 Message-Id: <1189A858F8918F43BE3F9C7603C73FB4031E7C32@0456-its-exmp01.us.saic.com> In-Reply-To: <23dc8c770703190452x453a53bcy41c34e42353ba3dc@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [lojban-beginners] Re: Debug my propaganda? Thread-Index: AcdqHWMcTD/CoSNpT9+tfS6FT+oZhgAAEypg From: "Turniansky, Michael" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2007 12:29:33.0479 (UTC) FILETIME=[3FC70B70:01C76A22] X-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-Spam-Score-Int: -24 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 4164 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners > -----Original Message----- > From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-beginners- > bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of Karl Naylor > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:52 AM > To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org > Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Debug my propaganda? > > On 19/03/07, Turniansky, Michael wrote: > > I've deleted a lot of your comments that I agree with, so the ones > that are left are the ones I'm less sure on... > > > > pavo jeftu cu temci lenu mi co'a tadni la lojban. > > pavo jeftu means 14 one-week periods. Also, since jeftu already talks > > about an event in the x1 place, you might like this: > > I think what I was actually after was "pavo se jeftu cu temci ..."; > "something that is 14 weeks in duration is the time period..." > But you don't need the temci part at all because the x1 of jeftu IS something that is x2 weeks in duration.... (also, it's important not to leave out the li in front of a number that is used as an argument) > > >.i .au da'i su'o pendo be mi cu bazi co'a tadni > > I think it's okay, but I'm not sure if the da'i adds much to it. > > I wanted something like "I wish you would" rather than "I hope you > will" (since they're not actually likely to learn; I'm just having a > bit of fun really). Is that the effect of {da'i}? da'i is unfortunately a bit slippery, but as I understand it basically is equivalent to the subjunctive voice in English ("If wishes were horses, beggars would rise"), to discuss hypothetical situations, although I'm not sure what it adds to the language that constructions like naja, et. al don't already provide. I hope some jbocertu will let us both know. > > > >.i seri'abo da'i mi'a ka'e tavla bau la lojban. vau .ui > > Yes, you want mu'i ot seri'a here, because you are talking about why > > _you want_ them to learn it. Here, you probably do want to use casnu, > > Well, not quite. This sentence is meant to be a consequence of my > friends learning Lojban, not of my desire for them to do so -- I was > thinking that the {ri'a} would not care about the {.au} in the last > sentence. Does it or doesn't it? > Well, yes, it is true that their learning lojban would cause them to be be capable of conversing with you in lojban. Your English translation just gave me the opinion that the "because" you wanted was one of desire, not stating cause and effect. > > language piece in it). The vau is not needed in either case. > > I think it is. I'm happy about the hypothetical event that I speak > Lojban with my friends, not about Lojban itself (in this case, > anyway). Without the {vau}, {.ui} would attach only to "la lojban.", > no? Ah. Well, I think it still only attaches to la lojban, because that's the only thing the vau closes off (I may be wrong here, I'll have to go back and check). I would have probably put the ui after the seri'abo myself. > > > > .i zo'o mi dapma le rodo ka tolcando > > Ungrammatical. You want either .i zo'o mi dapma le le rodo ka > > tolcando (you damn the property being busy of all of your audience) or > > .i zo'o mi dapma ro le do ka tolcando (you damn the entire quantity of > > being busy of your audience). Not sure which you are going for here... > > My reasoning was that {do} does not take an article, as it is a > pro-sumti. However, I'm unclear on whether {ro} when used with a > pro-sumti tries to add an implicit {lo} as it would with a selbri. I > wanted "I damn the (property of being busy) which is associated with > all of you". "le rodo" looks very strange to me, are you sure? > It does, but you can't use the shortcut expressing of "pe" with a quantifier without the gadri. "le le pa danlu ku mamta" (the mother of one of the animals) is fine, "le pa le danlu ku mamta" or "le pa danlu ku mamta" is not (well, actually, grammatically, they are fine, but mean "the one of the animals is a mother" and "the one animal is a mother" respectively, rather than "the mother of one of the animals") > Alternatively, what about "le ka tolcando pe rodo"? > Yes, that's fine.