From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri May 13 17:58:36 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Fri, 13 May 2005 18:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DWkzE-0006D9-DF for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 17:58:36 -0700 Received: from smtp4-2-sn2.hy.skanova.net ([81.228.8.93]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DWkz9-0006Cj-Jx for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Fri, 13 May 2005 17:58:36 -0700 Received: from localhost.localdomain (h239n2fls32o1007.telia.com [213.65.121.239]) by smtp4-2-sn2.hy.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D87381E1 for ; Sat, 14 May 2005 02:57:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6C22A5F4077; Sat, 14 May 2005 02:53:50 +0200 (CEST) To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: coi .i.e'o pinka References: <87wtq3nxxm.fsf@handgranat.org> <925d175605051308194b8956b0@mail.gmail.com> From: Sunnan Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 02:53:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <925d175605051308194b8956b0@mail.gmail.com> ( =?utf-8?q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas's_message_of?= "Fri, 13 May 2005 12:19:51 -0300") Message-ID: <87oebeocf7.fsf@handgranat.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 1456 X-Approved-By: jkominek@miranda.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: sunnan@handgranat.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Jorge Llambías writes: > On 5/13/05, Sunnan wrote: >> >> .e'o ko xe pinka to xendo je dukti kusru toi le xelfanva to tolfa'o toi >> -> http://handgranat.org/Bran_Van_3000/Mama_Don't_Smoke >> >> Okay, well... we'll just start. >> Ready? 1, 2, 3, Go. >> >> xamgu.y .i ma'a bazi cfari .i xu do bredi .i pa. re. ci. .imu'o > > This is all very idiomatic, so there's hardly one right translation. > Just a few comments: > > {ma'a} is I, you and others. I think we in this case "we" is {mi'o}, > the speaker and the people the speaker is addressing, nobody > else. I'm thinking the instrumentalists and the studio technicians, but (as per your idea below), I'll probably drop the pronouns. > {cfari} means that some event starts, not that someone starts > to do something. That would be {cfagau} for example. Or you > could just say {cfari} "something will start" without any pronoun. Yeah, I'll ditch the pronoun, good idea. > {pa re ci} is one hundred and twenty-three. You could say > {i pa i re i ci}. I'm thinking it's a count down for the rhythm. This is a song lyric originally. I was thinking that maybe in lojbanistan, musicians say one-hundred and twenty-three because it's got more rhythm than "separate one separate two separate three". > I don't know about {mu'o} there. Maybe {i pa i re i ci i ko}? I'm not sure. I kind've liked using the vocative there. jbofi'e gives a warning for a standalone ko. >> Mama, don't smoke that much dope. >> >> .i.e'o doi mamta ko na dampli la'u du'e lo marna > > "that much" is hard. Lojban is missing an amount deictic, > as well as a manner deictic, or at least a general purpose > deictic. I don't have a good alternative, but I would prefer > something like {ko na dampli lo marna} So, like: .i.e'o doi mamta ko na dampli lo du'e marna ? >> Don't you worry about me. >> >> .i.o'u ko mi na xanka > > OK, or {dunku}. I originally had .i.o'u mi na raktu ko, and xanka was a step up from that, but I'll consider dunku. >> I only get high about twice a day, >> >> .i.o'u mi reroi marna gleki ti'u ro djedi > > {ti'u} is for time of day, as in eleven forty-five. > > {ji'i re roi lo djedi} is "about twice a day". I read lo djedi as that it could happen about two times any given day - sunday one week, friday the next week, or something like that. I've been going back and forth between lo and ro, I'd rather have "most" or "usually" than *every*. I'll put lo for now, as per your suggestion. > You could use {do'a}, for "only/at most" here, > though this is not (yet) standard usage. > {do'a mi marna gleki ji'i re roi lo djedi}. I'll think about this, maybe I will. >> it helps to keep my blues away. >> >> .i lo go'i cu fanta lo mi betri ro'i > > {lo nu go'i}. I'm always thinking that I overuse "nu", so much that I tend to underuse it. Thanks. > Isn't "blues" more like {lo se badri} than {lo betri}? Yeah, that's a bit closer. Can I use seldri or is there a difference between seldri and se badri? >> Chris said something about all them long-haired Jesus Christ >> look-alikes, shining down on me... shining down on me. >> >> .i la krys. pu tavla fi role clani selkre prenu poi simsa la .iesus. >> gi'e gusni ni'a mi How about the other parts of the grammar here? For example, am I using poi wrong? > ni'a mi = under me. > Not sure what "shining down on me" means. The light comes from above, as in "The sun shines down on me". Maybe I'll add a "pe'a" but possibly she means literally. This ni'a was the thing I felt was most wrong with my translation and I'm still not sure how to write it right. >> I'm more laid back than you. Yeah, I'm more laid back >> than you will ever be. >> >> .i mi surmau do .i mi caca'o go'i do bacai > > That {bacai} doesn't go with {do} though, it says that I will > be more laid back than you. I don't really know that part of the grammar yet, but jbofi'e said: (0[i {mi <(1[ca ca'o] go'i)1 (1do [ba cai])1>}])0 (0[i {mi <(1[ca ca'o] go'i)1 (1[ba cai] do)1>}])0 and I can't tell the difference; it seems to go with do in both lines. Would .i mi caca'o go'i bacai do work? .uiru'e ki'esai -- .i mi'e snan .i mi rodo roda fraxu