From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue May 26 11:51:57 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:51:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M91ki-0001gw-VL for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:51:57 -0700 Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.44.157]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1M91kd-0001gm-LP for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:51:56 -0700 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 36so15042695yxh.46 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:51:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=r0LRIkXDvMwiSarH9Qv0ZZRczLtwx1iGtcIRbf4tGTk=; b=jx/aM9ZdaMn9/StIdJUlbN3qSSvw04WzR25yjKe2izo5l/6daEgZvxkg5Wl+gJByFo e+PwM2zeDm0h8AGa6B681giJzon9gBKajuG2uyoLmRrZHiUGSjo7m1+LYmLe+fUOcPSL zaxZ5QzToBvEcSjsdMdNTiNLBoDqjAk32tpNs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=B987LZnBgWMRIV4l5UqyUbXPzL07HFWmL9ihYd2wMisbq5Kq0aAjdtR9cHMD9+A5rK qyHyx3bmUB/SkoMzsBjgTOUbob5qh2lZ3l417xNV6jF7uu50AiI+9w7PWhfkP0v4kJka pCwxmqylWvLMfX3orq577oxZjtr7dhQjTEdW0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.227.18 with SMTP id z18mr15268499ang.49.1243363910338; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:51:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4de8c3930905260809y2ea3828dtf632f3f519af87cc@mail.gmail.com> References: <4de8c3930905260809y2ea3828dtf632f3f519af87cc@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 15:51:50 -0300 Message-ID: <925d17560905261151n159bcef9i3def0eff14e0cdad@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: lo nu binxo From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 1706 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:09 PM, tijlan wrote: > Here are some notes I took from the latter part of xorxes' "lo nu binxo". ki'e! >> .i lo patfu cu zi binxo lo sipna bu'u lo stizu ba lo vacri sanmi > > "vacri" -> "vanci" Fixed. >> [...] vimcu ca lo vanci se pi'o lo lumci burcu grana va'o lo nu lo cidja cu pu se troci gi'a to cafne traji toi na pu se pencu > > Maybe: "tu'a lo cidja cu pu se troci"? Changed to "lo cidja cu pu vrusi se zgana". >> .i ra zutse lo stuzi poi bu'u ke'a pu citka lo patfu jo'u lo mamta jo'u la .gregor. > > "fa" is missing after "citka". Fixed. >> .i lu ku'i mi na xagji sei la .gregor. fi gy se rukte cusku [...] .i si'a nai lo vitke [...] cu zi klama [...] lo canko noi vy stali ke'a ca lo nu lo patfu cu se rukte zgana vy > > "rukte"? Maybe "raktu"? Yes. (There was also another "rukte" that had to be "raktu".) >> ni'o ca lo mi'u vanci cu se tirna lo jgita noi la .gregor. na morji lo nu tirna ca lo temci > > At first I thought "se tirna" was a mistake, but there were more than > one instance of this (putting the agent in the x2). So I then guessed > it could be an intentional treatment, like "xruti". But then again: > >> .i je'u vy mutce simlu lo ka na se mansa fi lo pu se sruma poi nu tirna lo melbi ja zdile zgike be lo jgita > > So, I'm not sure. No, it was a mistake. That one I changed to "sance" instead of "se tirna", and I fixed the other instance. >> .i lo mensi cu surla gansu lo nu bredi fa lo ro se nitcu be fi lo nu kelci > > "gansu" -> "gasnu" Fixed. >> .i za'a bai lo certu xance be lo mensi lo ckana gacri jo'u lo kijne cu vofli fa'a lo galtu gi'e se ganzu > > "kijne" -> "kicne" Fixed. >> ro da nau badri je samji catlu > > samji -> smaji Fixed. >> .i gy stali lo tcini poi nu panpi je cando pensi ku'o co'u lo nu lo janla pe lo galtu dinju cu sance jarco li ci pe lo cerni murse > > janla -> junla Fixed. >> .i la'e di'u cu nau se jundi ca lo nu ge ra na se lafti lo cmalu tuple gi no drata cuntu cu trina lo nu catlu > > The English version goes like: > "That was apparent really for the first time, now that he was no > longer raised on his small limbs and, moreover, now that nothing else > distracted one's gaze." > So, why "trina", rather than "to'e trina"? Nothing else attracted/drew his gaze. I supose it depends what you take the x2 of catlu to be. >> lo nanmu po'u la .samsas. fau lo nu na'e lacri noi claxu lo krino tai lo nu ba se jarco [...] > > "krino" -> "krinu" Fixed. >> [...] cu klama lo bartu fi'o se kansa lo re ninmu fe lo serti tsina [...] > > I find this "fe" clever. Mr. Samsa stepped with the two women out (lo > bartu) onto the landing (lo serti tsina). Both "lo bartu" and "lo > serti tsina" can be the x2 of klama, which justifies repeating the > place with "fe". Yes. > Another possibility is "ce'o": klama lo bartu fi'o se kansa lo re > ninmu ku ce'o lo serti tsina. But that connects "lo re ninmu ku" with "lo serti tsina". Even "lo bartu ce'o lo serti tsina" wouldn't be quite right since it's not really a sequence, "lo bartu" and "lo serti tsina" is the same place. >> .i lo nanmu ca ro loldi cu to'e canci lo trixe be lo kruvi gi'e ba zi za'u re'u canci > > Is this "ca" intentional? I don't remember, but I now changed it to "bu'u". > The English version goes like: > "disappeared on each floor in a certain turn of the stairwell and in a > few seconds came out again." > So, it seems "to'e canci" and "canci" would have to be swapped? Yes, that makes more sense. Fixed. >> .i ra ge nai po'o pu jerna lo nu denpa fo lo nu gunka gi ji'a sai traji lo ka nitcu > > Maybe: "ge nai po'o" -> "ge po'o nai"? Yes. Fixed. > >> .i ca lo nu ciska lo sidju ninmu cu klama lo nenri te zu'e lo nu cusku lo se du'u sy ny cliva ki'u lo nu mo'u gunka lo me lo cerni moi > > "kei" is missing after "ciska". Fixed. >> .i ra klama lo nurma no'u lo bartu be lo tcadu fo lo trene > > Not "fu lo trene"? Yes, fixed. ki'e doi tijlan mu'o mi'e xorxes