Received: from MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 4 Aug 1993 11:51:49 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 4 Aug 1993 11:51:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199308041551.AA12941@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2260; Wed, 04 Aug 93 11:50:35 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 6475; Wed, 04 Aug 93 11:51:45 EDT Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1993 11:48:11 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: X-From-Space-Date: Ukn Aug 4 11:51:50 1993 X-From-Space-Address: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Colin, thanks a lot for the comments. (At least someone read it!) > Jorge, you said: > > >i uunai mi na fanva sebai le nu rodo se nandu le nu jimpe dei > >du'i le nu mi ciska dei > > After a little effort I realised you meant > "I'm not translating this so that you have the same difficulty > understanding this as I have writing it" > > Unfortunately, that's not what it means. > > The problem is that 'na' is a bridi-negator, and 'sebai' is > inside the bridi. You are absolutely right. I realized this on my way home yesterday, but it was too late to change it. > 1) use na'e, whose scope is the selbri only This is what I should have used. > Furthermore (as I said to > Rob) I don't believe ciska is appropriate. I was conscious of that, but I couldn't remember what was the appropriate word. I find the idea of inscribing on the screen appealing, though. > > 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.) Jorge