Message-Id: <199308161838.AA14507@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Date:         Mon, 16 Aug 1993 19:35:39 +0100
Reply-To: ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Mr Andrew Rosta <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: TEXT: Re: TEXT: Imagist
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Mon,
              16 Aug 93 10:50:24 N.) <9308161449.AA57999@link-1.ts.bcc.ac.uk>
Status: O

Colin writes:
> la'o grync And grync cusku la'o gyk
>  i
>
> dihu mi setese ciksi le krinu be le sohi pihonciha se srera
> sepahu roledo notci vekaha le jboxemrmri .i
> - bahe mi damba le tutcrvi .iucuhi ku vaho le vanbrlunixy
> faho
>
> [notes: I mean "sepahu" to link to "srera", "vekaha" to
> "notci", and "vaho" to "damba". "Tutcrvi" = the Vi editor
> of unix. "Vanbrlunixy" = (suitably ghastly) fuhivla for
> unix.]  i
>
> gyk
>
> Thanks for your notes.
> To link sepa'u to srera strictly you could use 'be':
> "se srera be se pa'u"
> "The many user-writing {errors which are part of...}"
            ?
I have piho down as a rafsi for pipno "piano" - I meant
typing = piano writing.

> but I suspect you really mean to link it to 'le .. srera',
> for which use 'pe'.
>
> "va'o" does link to "damba" with or without the 'ku' -
> it would need 'pe' or 'ne' to link to 'tutcrvi'.
>
> On the other hand, "ve ka'a" links to 'ciksi'. You need
> a 'pe' or 'ne' there.
>
> fu'ivla may not contain 'y', so vanbrlunixy is invalid.
>
> I'm not sure what the latest status is of varying
> lujvo glue - I believe 'n' is not optional,  and
> you should use "pi'orci'a", but I'm not dogmatic about
> that one.

I don't understand what you mean. I thought "n" is a legitimate
hyphen, & necessary because otherwise piho + ciha would
fall apart.

> I can't find rafsi "xem" and guess you mean
> 'jboxelmri'

In my rafsi list "xem" is the rafsi assigned to "xe".

> Corrected version:
>
> di'u mi setese ciksi le krinu be le so'i pi'orci'a se srera
> pe se pa'u ro le do notci pe ve ka'a le jboxelmri .i
> ba'e mi damba le tutcrvi .iu cu'i ku va'o le vanbrlunixi
> fa'o
>
> Pedantry time:
> le ciksi is an explainer. The explanation is the x4.
> I'm not sure whether there's a naughty sumti-raising
> in "krinu le .. srera", but I'm willing to let it be.

I meant the x1 of ciksi. I have not studied the gismu places
thoroughlt enough to know whether I would recant on this.
I interpret the "x1 (person)" as a non-defining feature.

I wonder, incidentally, how to translate "explain that [clause]"
- the x2 of ciksi seems also to be the x4 of ciksi.

mihe la. And.