From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Aug 06 19:52:49 2007
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1IIFBg-00039a-OX	for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:52:49 -0700
Received: from phma.optus.nu ([166.82.175.165] helo=ixazon.dynip.com)	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67)	(envelope-from <phma@phma.optus.nu>)	id 1IIFBd-00039T-RF	for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:52:48 -0700
Received: from chausie (unknown [192.168.7.4])	by ixazon.dynip.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F23CE723	for <lojban-beginners@lojban.org>; Mon,  6 Aug 2007 22:52:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: The Prophet
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 22:52:35 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
References: <2f91285f0708061616s75cbc972p934abc12312313ef@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2f91285f0708061616s75cbc972p934abc12312313ef@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200708062252.37364.phma@phma.optus.nu>
X-Spam-Score: 0.1
X-Spam-Score-Int: 1
X-Spam-Bar: /
X-archive-position: 5302
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-beginners

On Monday 06 August 2007 19:16, Vid Sintef wrote:
> mi'e vid
>
> Again a sentence from The Prophet:
>
> .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

This doesn't parse.
{so'i} counts {se djedi nu mi lo cortu ...}.
{se djedi} is a seltau, {nu ...} is a tertau.
{mi lo cortu ...} is an abstractand, and ought to be a complete bridi.
{lo cortu ...} is the second sumti of the abstractand.
{cortu gi'e ...} is a selbri which {lo} turns into a sumti.
{cortu gi'e le} is ungrammatical. {gi'e} joins two bridi-tails, and a 
bridi-tail cannot begin with {le}.

> (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?)

{so'i se djedi} doesn't mean "long were the days". It means "many different 
lengths of time intervals, each of which is measured in days".

{lemi ka sepli cu nicte go'i} means "My separateness is a nighttime <whatever 
the previous sentence was>". I'm not even sure I could figure out what the 
previous sentence was if I had the context, as what we have doesn't parse.

{ma kakne cliva} probably should be {ma ka'e cliva}, but as it's preceded by 
another messed-up {gi'e}, I'm not sure.

{secau lo xenru} should be {secau lo nu xenru}.

> Where is the "I have spent within its walls"?

Nowhere that I can see.

> Neither I'm clear about the sequence {nu mi lo cortu}.

A sentence can begin with {nu mi lo cortu}, but here it's an error, perhaps 
for {lo nu mi cortu}.

Pierre