Message-Id: <199511022041.PAA07122@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Thu, 2 Nov 1995 15:34:55 EST
Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: all the chinese whispers
To: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
Status: OR

> Well, we've completed our first round. Would someone care to initiate
> a new one? We remain six:
>
> >     And     ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk
> >     Goran   <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
> >     Don     dwiggins@bfsec.bt.co.uk
> >     Chris   cbogart@netcom.com
> >     Iain    I.Alexander@bra0125.wins.icl.co.uk
> >     Jorge   jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU

I will start a new one. If anyone not on that list wants to participate,
write to me. I assume that those on the list will participate unless
I hear otherwise. You don't need to be an expert to participate.

> I begin with the translations. I append a few initial comments of my own
> at the end. As Jorge is our official summarizer, I leave it to him to
> decide whether to forward this straight to the list, with us posting
> comments to the list, or whether we should send comments to Jorge for
> him to summarize and post.

I decide to forward it straight to the list. Much less work. :)
My comments follow in another post.

> 1. John Le Carre _The secret pilgrim_
>
>   Next day I come back to the hotel. Meetings all day long.
>   Lot of trying to like each other. And I do, I mean they're
>   nice chaps.
>
> 2. And:
>
>   Ca le lambavdei mi zilxru le xotli i taacuu ca ro donri
>   i mutce nu troci lo dahi nu le noa ri nelci i mi gohi i zaa
>   melpre
>
> 3. Goran:
>
> "This is what you wrote (as far as I can see):
>
>   Tomorrow I return(*) from the hotel. Wait, Shoohoo... All
>   days. Really trying that those who do try that those who try that
>   (...) like themselves. I really try that those who do try that those
>   who try that (...) like themselves. Nice people, I see.
>
> (*) I can't imagine a relationship of returning without there being
> something being returned (assuming that it was x2 you wanted
> obliterated)
>
> And this is what I think you meant:
>
>   Tomorrow I return from the hotel. Saying all day. I really try that the
>   participants enjoy themselves. I do. Nice people, I see."
>
> 4. Don:
>
>   ca le bavlamdei mi xruti fo le xotli
>   .i tavla ca'o le donri
>   .i mi mutce le ka troci le nu lei zukte cu se zdile
>   .i mi go'i
>   .i pluka prenu ga'a mi
>
> 5. Chris:
>
>   Tomorrow I will return from the hotel.
>   I will talk during the daytime.
>   I'm good at trying to amuse people who do things.
>   Me too.
>   I observe pleasant people.
>
> 6. Iain:
>
>   ca le bavlamdjedi mi ba sezyxruti fo le xotli
>   .i mi ba tavla ca'o le donri
>   .i mi certu le nu troci lenu jai zdile lo'e prenu poi gasnu da
>   .i mi ji'a
>   .i mi zgana lo pluka prenu
>
> 7. Jorge:
>
>   "I will be back from the hotel tomorrow. I will be talking all day.
>   I'm an expert in trying to entertain people who do something in
>   common. I do too. I observe nice people."
>
>
> Pretty good, eh? Most of the garbling seems to have occurred right
> at the start due to me!
>
> Here are some comments on the Le Carre -> me -> Goran portion.
>
> {zilxru}: I meant {zil} to delete x1 of {xruti} - i.e. go from
> "x1 returns x2 to x3 from x4" to "z1=x2 returns to z2=x3 from z3=x4".
>
> Translating {le lambavdei} as "tomorrow" is a bit incautious; "the next
> day" is safer.
>
> {taacuu} should have been {taarcuu}. But it was a pretty bad translation.
> I would change it to {casnu} (not {penmi}).
>
> I meant {mutce nu troci} to be understood as {da mutce nu de troci},
> rather than as {mi mutce troci}, which is how Goran understood it
> (japanesely). Evidently we must be cautious with ellipted sumti.
>
> As I myself have said I think {noa} leads to selffeeding recursion
> I can't complain at Goran reading it thus.
>
> I can't quite see where Goran's "the participants" came from. I meant
> "the triers".
>
> {le noa ri nelci} was a bit of a risk: I knew it might get taken
> as reflexive rather than reciprocal, but I was loth to use a
> cumbersome {soi} phrase.
>
> {zaa} was a poor rendering of the original.
>
>
> =========And
>