Message-Id: <199607292213.SAA18514@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Mon, 29 Jul 1996 22:35:56 +0100
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      may the wind...
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Content-Length: 2442
Lines: 65

Content-Length: 2411
Lines: 62

Content-Length: 2379
Lines: 59

{ao roroi ge brife gi catke lei rixxadni be do}

Kolin offers:
> I would say
>        do stoga'e le rixfarbi'e a'o

That works, though with nonce lujvo.

> or more laconically
>        roroi brife le do trixe .a'o
>        (at all times something is a wind from the rear of you [hope])

Except that a wind from the rear of you is not necessarily blowing
towards your back.

> This is still fairly literal, and probably not really what is wanted.
> Better still would be
>        brife nagi'a trixe .a'o do
>        (something is a wind only-if [it] is-behind [hope] you).

Is that really what it means? Does it really mean "May *all* wind be
on your back?"
Same applies to Steven's: {peha brife nagi'a trixe .a'o do} "May there be
something that is wind only if it is behind you" - doesn't quite get the
right meaning.

There seems to be a misunderstanding concerning metaphor:

Andruc: "We should of course translate "may the wind..." first into what
it means, something like ?? "I hope always/most of the time you are helped
(by something)" ?? and then into lojban"
Bob Weiss:
"As I understand Lojban, the literal translation of these aphorisms
contains no more than their literal meaning, e.g., either that there
should be some wind in back of a person (now what could that mean?) or
that some wind should be blowing towards his back.  Now, that's not really
what the original means at all."
Chris: "I'd expect metaphors could often be safely used in Lojban"

There is a difference between what sentences mean, on the one hand, and,
on the other hand, what speakers mean (=intend to communicate) when they
use them.

Metaphor is a relationship between what sentences mean and what speakers
mean. Metaphor is therefore not used "in lojban" or "in" any language.
Rather, any language, or any symbolic system can be used to represent
an idea that serves as the vehicle of metaphor.

Chris:
> But I agree that speaking-without-metaphor ought to be a mode of
> lojbanic usage that people train themselves to be able to use when
> necessary.

Some would argue that this is psychologically impossible and that every
sentence is used metaphorically; to some extent the literal meaning of
every sentence bears a resemblance rather than an exact correspondence
to the intended meaning of the sentence's speaker.

coo, mie And