Message-Id: <9207010225.AA19707@relay1.UU.NET>
Date:         Wed, 1 Jul 1992 12:21:08 +1000
Reply-To: cbmvax!uunet!MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU!nsn
Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMB.BITNET!pucc.Princeton.EDU!LOJBAN>
From: cbmvax!uunet!MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU!nsn
Subject:      Phone game: Fawlty
To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>,
        Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Status: RO

Ivan started with this not unfamous phrase (at least in the Commonwealth):

BASIL FAWLTY: "Listen... (he whispers through his teeth) Don't mention the
war... *I* mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it all right."

His translation:

la'o .ing. Basil Fawlty .ing.
   lu .i ju'isai .y.  seisa'a va'ucru bepa'o lei denci
      .i ko na cusku sera'a le jamna .y.
      .i pa'e mi puparoi go'i
      .i ku'i pe'i no sfaxla be mi pujebaji'a jalge la'edi'u
   li'u

The {la'o} convention - well, I think we all now the onomastic politics on
lojban-list, so we needn't argue its virtue against {la bazil. foltis.}
({foltij.}?)

Ivan> Even {foltij.} would have been less useful for Colin than "Fawlty".

The convention, in "dramatic" writing, of omitting {bacru} in
such sentences, is mine.

Ivan> Yes.  Glad you acknowledge your guilt in this case.  (I seldom miss an
Ivan> opportunity to learn from you.)

(cue for Nick to blush :)

Since then, I've myself wondered whether I shouldn't
have preferred something like {la'ogy. Fawlty gy. ne lu li'o}, making the
link between the name and quote explicit...

Ivan> I'd say no.  I take the {ne ...} as an afterthought modifier.  Fawlty,
Ivan> who is somehow linked with this utterance ... well, what about him?

Do phrases quoted by {lu} start with {.i}? Namely, in conversation, do we
start our respective phrases with {.i}? Grammatically, yes, and it's proper
that Ivan has remembered to do so: we seldom do.

As you'll note, the {sa'a} modifies the whole {sei} clause, not just the
word {sei}. This, too, is proper; I don't remember if lojbab ever explicitly
allowed this, though.

{.y} for a pause? Well, it works; wouldn't a long pause in lojban (";" or
"..") have done so too?

{pa'e} here means "Fair enough, I mentioned it..."; this looks like a typo
for {ba'e}, which accords with the original's italics.

Ivan> No, I meant {pa'e}, because `Fair enough, ...' is how I understand it,
Ivan> pree"mpting the "well, but didn't you yourself ..." reply.  {ba'e}
Ivan> wouldn't work here ("leave this subject to me, pal; if anyone should
Ivan> mention the war, it is I").

{no sfaxla} is an, um, reasonable translation, but as you'll see from Colin's
translation, there's something heavy about it - especially the {baji'a}. I'd
have said {mi na se xlali}, or at least {.ija'enaibo mi snada lenu na se
sfaxla la'edi'u}.

Colin:

Basil Fawlty:  Look, er, (whispering through his teeth), don't mention
the war ... er ... well, actually I did once, and nothing awful happened
to me then or ever.

Those "er"s are in to stay. It is typically Basilic diction, of course.
The lack of UI in Ivan's translation is showing; this Basil sounds much
meeker than the Brilliantine-man we love. In particular, "nothing awful
happened" is not the same as "get away with it". {.u'a}, at least.

Ivan> It would've been closer if my {jalge la'edi'u} `as a result of that'
Ivan> (that is, of his mentioning the war) had made it into Colin's English.
Ivan> Or so I think.

Is "actually" Colin's interpretation of {pa'e}? I came up with another, more
explicit, above; this will almost do :)

Sylvia must have taken the anagram "WATERY FOWLS" on the front sign of the
hotel to heart :)

.i la basil. faultis. bacru lu ju'i .y. to smaji bacru
 sekai lamji denci to'i e'u ko na tavla fi le nunjamna
.y. i ju'o bo mi pu ki pamoi go'i .i no da poi
 malnalfunca ca'ajeba se lifri mi li'u

from {to'i}, I see Sylvia is trying to do an editorial parenthesis; but
it's not all there. In the old system, it was {to'a...to'i}, and now it's
{to'i...toi}; never {to}. Still, the {to'i} tells us what we need to know.
{sekai lamji denci} is ungrammatical; should be {sekai le lamji denci}.

As Sylvia has not come under my pernicious influence :) , she puts the {bacru}
back. OK.
I'm not sure about {.i ju'o bo}. {ju'o} is not a BAI; it means "Certainly!"
{.iji'ubo} would mean "I say this based on the fact that..."
{pamoi go'i} means "I was the first to do so". Should be {paroi}
Interesting that I consider {funca} to be good or bad, whereas Sylvia -
to be present or absent. Neither of us is wrong yet...
I much prefer breathe-speak to quiet-speak.

Nora:

Basil Fawlty said "Hey, ya know," (quietly through closed teeth), "How
about not talking about war.  Well, I know, I was the first to do so.
Nothing unfortunate actually ever happened to me."

"Hey, ya know." Hohoho. Basil would appreciate that :)

Now, though I never get {gadri} right, "about war" really corresponds to
{loi nunjamna}

{ju'o} = "I know"? Actually, that's reasonable; what got into me?

"then or ever" --> "actually ever"? What gives? Well, Sylvia took {ca'a}
as a tense, *distinct* from {ba}. Properly, maybe it isn't; but I still
find "then, in fact, and after" more plausible than "actually ever": the
latter is {ca'aba} or {ca'aku'aba} or {ca'ajoiba}.

Gradually, we have lost the fact that nothing unfortunate happened *as a
result* of Basil's once-transgression. ("Hors-d'-oeuvres vich must be
obeyed at all times!" :)

Mark, all too apologetically, finishes with:

la basil. foltis. smaji jeke denci ganlo ke'e cusku lu ju'ido'u
na casnu .o'iro'a.e'u lo nunjamna .i ba'anaiza'a ba'e mi pu pamoi casnu
.i no mabla cu da'inai se lifri mi

]The initial tanru is uncomfortably long and literal; I wasn't positive what
]to make of it in the English sentence.  "no mabla" is sortakinda close for
]"nothing unfortunate"; the English has nothing to do with fortune or
]misfortune.  I was thinking of {mabla} as {to'e zabna} (which it pretty
]much is), and we say {zabna lifri} for good experiences.

Having started with:

BASIL FAWLTY: "Listen... (he whispers through his teeth) Don't mention the
war... *I* mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it all right."

we thus conclude with:

Basil Fawlty quietly and teeth closed says: "Watch out! [You're] not to
discuss (Be socially cautious, I'm warning you!) any war. I observe and recall
that *I* was the first discussor [of one]. Nothing despicable was actually
experienced by me." [During the war, during his discussion?]

Ivan> Sounds as though he means has never experienced war, or anything
Ivan> despicable for that matter.  Sigh.

---
'Dera me xhama t"e larm"e,	      T  Nick Nicholas, EE & CS, Melbourne Uni
 Dera mbas blerimit		      |         Mail: nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au
 Me xhama t"e larm"e!		      |  Omiloume ellhnika/Esperanto parolata/
 Lumtunia nuk ka ngjyra tjera.'	      |  {mika'e tavla baula lojban.je'uru'e}
 - Martin Camaj, _Nj"e Shp'i e Vetme_ |      (Better .sig suggestions welcome)