Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c04::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <23148286.aPXrplANTa@caracal>
References: <b15b8cb4-2f0f-45e4-b630-6480ed7d4654@googlegroups.com>
	<23148286.aPXrplANTa@caracal>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:32:54 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2epffntAR4p79cCfaJNKpQaSEh0a+Xz4Yv36ZgA=f3eCw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Speaker specificity: {.i da'i na vajni}
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c36e3259d65a05040dbff3
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a11c36e3259d65a05040dbff3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Pierre Abbat <phma@bezitopo.org> wrote:

>
> Here are some verses from 1 Samuel 9 (which la mukti has been reviewing):
>
> \v 3 .i cirko le fetxasli pe la .kic. noi patfu la .ca'ul .i ri cusku lu
> ko se
> kansa lo selfu lo nu sisku le xasli li'u la .ca'ul.
>
> The writer has specific donkeys in mind.
>

Does that mean that the writer would be able to identify the donkeys, or
just that he's talking about Kish's donkeys, whichever they might be? What
would be different if they had written "lo fetxasli pe la .kic."?

\v 5 .i tolcliva la .tsuf .i la .ca'ul. cusku lu .e'u mi'o xruti mi'o
> .itezu'ebo naku lo patfu be mi cu tolmo'i fi le xasli gi'e xanka tu'a mi'o
> li'u
> le selfu noi kansa .sy
>
> Saul has his father specifically in mind, but he has only one father, so
> there's no need to signal the fact. But Kish may have other jennies who
> weren't lost. (Kish's lost donkeys, like the one Balaam rode, were female,
> for
> which Hebrew uses a completely different word.)
>

KJV has: "And the asses of Kish Saul's father were lost." That suggests
Kish didn't have other asses. If you were translating from this version,
would you have used "lo"?

\v 6 .i dafsku lu le cevni nanmu cu xabju lo vi tcadu .i ra goi ko'a mutce
> misno .i ro lo se cusku be ko'a cu binxo lo jetnu je'usai .i .e'u mi'o
> vitke
> ko'a .i.a'o ko'a cusku lo sedu'u mi'o klama fo makau .ei kei mi'o li'u
>
> The servant knows who the man of God is, but Saul doesn't know who he is or
> even that there is one nearby.
>

What about "lo vi tcadu"? Doesn't he have a particular nearby city in mind?

>
> \v 15 ni'o ca lo prulamdei be lo nu la .ca'ul. tolcliva kei la .iaves.
> tolmipri fi la .cmuel. lo nu ri tirna kei
> \v 16 fe lu ba za lo djedi be li pa mi benji fo'a goi le nanmu pe lo la
> .beniamin. tumla do li'o li'u
>
> How can God *not* have a specific one in mind? :)


But if it's obvious then why should God need to signal it? And would God
not have a specific one day period in mind as well? And a specific tumla?

It still seems to me that the choice of when to use "le" is more or less
haphazard.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--001a11c36e3259d65a05040dbff3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Pierre Abbat <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a=
 href=3D"mailto:phma@bezitopo.org" target=3D"_blank">phma@bezitopo.org</a>&=
gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);bord=
er-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D""><br>
</span>Here are some verses from 1 Samuel 9 (which la mukti has been review=
ing):<br>
<br>
\v 3 .i cirko le fetxasli pe la .kic. noi patfu la .ca&#39;ul .i ri cusku l=
u ko se<br>
kansa lo selfu lo nu sisku le xasli li&#39;u la .ca&#39;ul.<br>
<br>
The writer has specific donkeys in mind.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><di=
v>Does that mean that the writer would be able to identify the donkeys, or =
just that he&#39;s talking about Kish&#39;s donkeys, whichever they might b=
e? What would be different if they had written &quot;lo fetxasli pe la .kic=
.&quot;?=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(20=
4,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
\v 5 .i tolcliva la .tsuf .i la .ca&#39;ul. cusku lu .e&#39;u mi&#39;o xrut=
i mi&#39;o<br>
.itezu&#39;ebo naku lo patfu be mi cu tolmo&#39;i fi le xasli gi&#39;e xank=
a tu&#39;a mi&#39;o li&#39;u<br>
le selfu noi kansa .sy<br>
<br>
Saul has his father specifically in mind, but he has only one father, so<br=
>
there&#39;s no need to signal the fact. But Kish may have other jennies who=
<br>
weren&#39;t lost. (Kish&#39;s lost donkeys, like the one Balaam rode, were =
female, for<br>
which Hebrew uses a completely different word.)<br></blockquote><div><br></=
div>KJV has: &quot;And the asses of Kish Saul&#39;s father were lost.&quot;=
 That suggests Kish didn&#39;t have other asses. If you were translating fr=
om this version, would you have used &quot;lo&quot;?</div><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_q=
uote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-c=
olor:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
\v 6 .i dafsku lu le cevni nanmu cu xabju lo vi tcadu .i ra goi ko&#39;a mu=
tce<br>
misno .i ro lo se cusku be ko&#39;a cu binxo lo jetnu je&#39;usai .i .e&#39=
;u mi&#39;o vitke<br>
ko&#39;a .i.a&#39;o ko&#39;a cusku lo sedu&#39;u mi&#39;o klama fo makau .e=
i kei mi&#39;o li&#39;u<br>
<br>
The servant knows who the man of God is, but Saul doesn&#39;t know who he i=
s or<br>
even that there is one nearby.<br></blockquote><div>=C2=A0</div><div>What a=
bout &quot;lo vi tcadu&quot;? Doesn&#39;t he have a particular nearby city =
in mind?=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);borde=
r-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
\v 15 ni&#39;o ca lo prulamdei be lo nu la .ca&#39;ul. tolcliva kei la .iav=
es.<br>
tolmipri fi la .cmuel. lo nu ri tirna kei<br>
\v 16 fe lu ba za lo djedi be li pa mi benji fo&#39;a goi le nanmu pe lo la=
<br>
.beniamin. tumla do li&#39;o li&#39;u<br>
<br>
How can God *not* have a specific one in mind? :)</blockquote><div><br></di=
v><div>But if it&#39;s obvious then why should God need to signal it? And w=
ould God not have a specific one day period in mind as well? And a specific=
 tumla?</div><div><br></div><div>It still seems to me that the choice of wh=
en to use &quot;le&quot; is more or less haphazard.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>mu&#39;o mi&#39;e xorxes=C2=A0</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--001a11c36e3259d65a05040dbff3--