Return-Path: <@segate.sunet.se:LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@BITMAIL.LSOFT.COM>
Received: from segate.sunet.se by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi  with smtp
	(Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0sxY9e-0000ZPC; Tue, 26 Sep 95 13:26 EET
Message-Id: <m0sxY9e-0000ZPC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from listmail.sunet.se by segate.sunet.se (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id ACB03CC6 ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 12:11:29 +0200
Date:         Tue, 26 Sep 1995 06:34:51 +0100
Reply-To:     ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Beginners question (was: Re: coi za'e jboterymri)
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 661
Lines: 15

kir:
> I'm to translate sentense "The lojban word 'valsi' is gismu" into lojban.
> My first attempt was: {zo valsi poi lojbo valsi cu gismu}.
> But back-translations seems like "'valsi', the lojban word, is gismu" -
> not exactly the same. Really "lojban word 'valsi'" seems very like to
> "plgs" and I feel it must be translated as tanru.
> So my second attempt was: {le lojbo valsi me zo valsi cu gismu}.
> And now the question: what version is right? If both, what is better and
> why? And what is the difference between them?

Closest to the English is {le jbobau valsi po'u zo valsi cu gismu},
or perhaps {zo valsi po'u le jbobau valsi cu gismu}.

---
And