From jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Wed Aug 4 12:54:54 1993 Received: from MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 4 Aug 1993 12:54:52 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 4 Aug 1993 12:54:48 -0400 Message-Id: <199308041654.AA16387@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2680; Wed, 04 Aug 93 12:53:40 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 7485; Wed, 04 Aug 93 12:55:10 EDT Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 12:50:44 EDT Reply-To: Jorge LLambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge LLambias Subject: Re: Jorge's text (Was: On the tense system of ZAhO) X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: Colin: > > For myself I would use mu'i rather than sebai anyway - > > I believe your intent is to explain WHY you're not translating > > it, whereas what you' ve said is that you're not translating > > it, compelling .... > > That's what I meant! Hence the uunai. (Which does not mean non-regret, > but cruelty.) > > Is it really what you meant? > An English gloss would be > "I am not translating it and you will find that as hard as I find it to write" > which would still be true if you were to add > "i je mi na djica le nu do se nandu" > I was thinking of: "I am not translating it, which compels the fact that the difficulty of your understaning what I wrote will equal that of my writing it. (And I'm not sorry about it)" (ie I was trying to be cruel, hoping that I'd be forgiven anyway, but I didn't say this last bit.) Jorge