Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Tue, 24 Mar 92 12:29 EST Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA26616; Tue, 24 Mar 92 11:47:28 EST Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA18383; Tue, 24 Mar 92 11:12:11 -0500 Message-Id: <9203241612.AA18383@relay1.UU.NET> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by pucc.Princeton.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0207; Tue, 24 Mar 92 11:11:30 EST Received: by PUCC (Mailer R2.08 ptf012) id 4832; Tue, 24 Mar 92 10:08:49 EST Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1992 14:28:48 GMT Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski Sender: Lojban list From: Ivan A Derzhanski Subject: A fairy tale To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann In-Reply-To: CJ FINE's message of Thu, 19 Mar 1992 17:43:30 GMT <15505.9203200548@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Mar 24 12:30:13 1992 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1992 17:43:30 GMT > From: CJ FINE > > Answering Ivan's comments on my text > > > > > > lu le nolraixli nega'u le dembi li'u > > > > {ga'u}, `up from '? Does this work for static `on'? > > I don't know how else to do it! How about {gapru} ({le nolraixli poi gapru le dembi})? > > {nolrainanla}. That is, `most noble lad'. {nolraitrubre} would be > > more precise, but it is too long. Pity we have no gismu for `monarch'. > > Please join me in a campaign against precision. Campaign against precision? You'll have to fight me then. :-) In this case here the English is really ambiguous: a prince can be the son of a king (or a pharaoh, or...), or he can be the ruler of a principality. If this ambiguity is regular, that is, if it is not by chance that English uses the same word, then we're in trouble, because the disjunctive concept won't be easy to put into Lojban. > <...> why is the Prince of Liechtenstein not a king? Because Liechtenstein is not a kingdom. I'm afraid this fact won't be easy to express in Lojban, since all emperors, czars, kings, princes (such as the one of Liechtenstein) and the like are equally {nobli traji turni}. If we want to distinguish between them, we'll need le'avla, as we will if we want to talk of dukes, marquesses, earls, viscounts, barons, baronets and knights. Note that the prince of Liechtenstein is not a {nanla} anymore. > The precision you suggest is not necessary here. Even if the > prince is in fact the son of a king (as it later appears > he is) that does not mean that you have to say so. I fail to see why you would want not to, given that it takes no extra labour; that is, why you want to keep the imprecision of the original. > > Er, I think {slabu} meant {to'e cnino}, not {to'e citno}. > > I hope you're wrong. Verdict, Messrs LeChevalier and Cowan? > Good thought about the pronoun. I hate "goi" - it always seems > intrusive, particularly in a translation (as opposed to an original > composition). Not in my eyes. I love {goi}. Three short syllables - {goi qo'w} - save you a lot of repetition afterwards, particularly in original composition (as opposed to a translation; but still you'll find that many referential noun phrases have no particularly literary value and will profit from being replaced by a pronoun). > > [{cucyzbi}] is a good Danish tanru, but .uu it is a poor Lojban tanru. > > ko cusku ledo krinu bedi'u pe'udoi .ivAn Well, actually, maybe I'm wrong. It seems to me that something can only be called a {nazbi} if it is really a body part - a breathing tool and organ of olfaction. If this is not the case, then I propose the Slavic-inspired tanru {cucyza'u} for the heel part of the shoe. Ivan