Return-Path: Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19) id ; Mon, 29 Jun 92 15:41 EDT Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91) id AA04031; Mon, 29 Jun 92 15:42:55 EDT Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA20423; Mon, 29 Jun 92 15:15:48 -0400 Message-Id: <9206291915.AA20423@relay1.UU.NET> Received: from PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU by pucc.Princeton.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7455; Mon, 29 Jun 92 15:15:22 EDT Received: by PUCC (Mailer R2.08 ptf033) id 5425; Mon, 29 Jun 92 15:13:43 EDT Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 20:09:44 BST Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski Sender: Lojban list From: Ivan A Derzhanski Subject: Phone game: TV To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann In-Reply-To: CJ FINE's message of Mon, 29 Jun 1992 18:19:11 BST <387.9206291811@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jun 29 15:41:42 1992 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!CUVMB.BITNET!LOJBAN > Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 18:19:11 BST > From: CJ FINE > > Ivan comments on the Phone Game: > > > In general, my strategy as a fonxa kelci is based on the understanding > > that the sentence(s) I get from Mark are to be translated faithfully, > > even if real world knowledge suggests that he intends something else > > than the obtained meaning, and that his additional comments must not > > be read until my own translation has gone off to Colin, or if read > > must be ignored and not allowed to influence my understanding of the text. > > I too have followed this strategy (though I confess I have sometimes > allowed guesses about the English to govern the style of my translation, > but not the content). I seldom appended any comments to the text that went to you, though, whereas Mark always did, and I had to resist the temptation to resolve my doubts by letting myself be influenced by them. > > > .ua doza'a cavi jundi le vidni doi citnau .ibabo do klama gi'ebabo > > > sraji .i'e zutse gi'e na kelci le sanmi > > > > I didn't mean "go" in "you'll go and ..." to be interpreted literally > > (as {klama}). Is there really no such idiom in English? > > Yes, of course there is, but I'm following the precept we just > discussed! Meaning, you can't tell whether my "go and ..." is idiomatic or not? True, I hadn't thought of that. I employed all my idiomatic English struggling to express the shades of meaning for which Lojban has straightforward attitudinals, but I ought've been more careful with idioms that also have a plausible literal interpretation. Ivan