Message-Id: <199411292023.AA18912@nfs1.digex.net> From: bob@GNU.AI.MIT.EDU Date: Tue Nov 29 15:23:12 1994 Subject: Someone swimming (simple exercise) Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Nov 29 15:23:12 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Let's consider how to translate the following from English to Lojban: I saw someone swimming. There are numerous issues: The `I saw' part translates as mi pu ze'a zgana I/We behold or perhaps as mi pu mo'u zgana I/We behold I think {pu ze'a} is closer to a likely English meaning: I am not focusing on having completed looking, but on having seen for a while. Another issue is whether the English `I' is best translated as {mi}, meaning `I/We ' or {mi poi pavysei} meaning `I who am a oneness-apart.' I think the naked {mi} is best. The English speaker probably is not concerned whether he or she is the only person to have seen the swimming (although in a mystery story he or she might be). A third issue is whether {zgana} or {viska} are better choices for `saw': zgana x1 observes/[notices]/watches/behold x2 using senses/means x3 under conditions x4 viska x1 sees/perceives visually x2 under conditions x3 I think if I just caught sight of someone swimming, for a short period of time, I would write mi pu ze'i viska but I am likely to look at someone swimming for a while, to observe them, so {mi pu ze'a zgana} is a better choice. I don't think there is likely to be a question as to how I beheld the swimming, whether by hearing or seeing, so {viska zgana}, {vi'azga} is not needed. (Of course, if I observed by hearing, I would say {tirna zgana}, {tinzga}.) Now, what did I see? mi pu ze'a zgana le limna I saw what I designate as swimming. This works, but could refer to a toy submarine gliding under water. mi pu ze'a zgana lo limna I saw that which is for real swimming. This is somewhat better. We have `for real' swimming. However, {lo limna} focuses the listener's attention on the x1 place of {limna}; this Lojban sentence might be translated back into English as I saw a real swimmer. This is not the spirit of `I saw someone swimming', except in the context of: I saw someone swimming beyond the rocks mi pu ze'a zgana lo limna ze'o lo rokci In that context, my focus is on the x1 place. However, in general, my utterance is about an activity that I saw: mi pu ze'a zgana le zu'o limna I saw what I designate as an activity of swimming. Closer, but this could apply to a bunch of toy submarines gliding about. mi pu ze'a zgana lo zu'o limna I saw what is really an activity of swimming. Yet closer, but this could apply to fish as well as people. Usually, the English `someone' refers to a person. mi pu ze'a zgana lo zu'o le prenu cu limna I saw what is really an activity of one or more what I designate as people swimming. Hmm... a bunch of monkeys swimming? mi pu ze'a zgana lo zu'o lo prenu cu limna I saw what is really an activity of one or more of what really are people swimming. The original English specified `someone'; we need to restrict the number: mi pu ze'a zgana lo zu'o pa lo prenu cu limna I saw an activity of one person swimming. This would do, but I suggest that it misses the spirit of the English, which is not telling you much about the person, nor focusing on number (unless you are a logician). Consider the following: mi pu ze'a zgana lo zu'o loi prenu cu limna I saw an activity of Mr. Person swimming. This is closer to the spirit of the English: I saw someone swimming. However, it seems to me that the closest to the spirit of the English is actually an expression that does not translate strictly: mi pu ze'a zgana loi limna I saw a manifestation of Swim. If I were on the beach, I think this is what I would say. Robert J. Chassell bob@grackle.stockbridge.ma.us 25 Rattlesnake Mountain Road bob@gnu.ai.mit.edu Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA (413) 298-4725