Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tJ3IC-0000ZUC; Fri, 24 Nov 95 20:56 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5E603D0F ; Fri, 24 Nov 1995 19:56:12 +0100 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 09:36:00 -0700 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: self-descriptions? X-To: lojban@cuvmb.bitnet To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1144 Lines: 24 >> ji'a I don't understand the second, either. Why sexipa? Isn't that the >> same as {mi nundraci kelci}? > >I thought {se xi pa} gives the x6 place. x6 of {nundraci} is the actor. Not sure, but in nundraci doesn't the x1 of draci, the actor, get moved to x2, x2 to x3, etc. and x5 to x6? Or does the x1 jump immediately to x6? >> I spent 5 to 10 minutes translating this jufra! What an obfuscation! > >Well done, then. Why did you find it difficult? It's in an unfamiliar >style, but there isn't lots of deep subordination and tons of terminators >and stuff. Note too that I couldn't write and English or Serbocroat >sentence of that length that would take you so long to puzzle out. >This shows how limited our command of the language still is. Another possibility: it shows that Lojban is capable of more obfuscation than some other languages. Perhaps a comparable sentence in Latin could have been made that difficult even for a fluent Latinist (since Latin like Lojban lets you thoroughly scramble word order) ____ Chris Bogart \ / http://www.quetzal.com Boulder, CO \/ cbogart@quetzal.com