Date:         Tue, 14 Jul 1998 20:43:06 -0300
Reply-To:     "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: short treat from LogFest
To:           Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Message-ID: <900459857.118788.0@listserv.cuny.edu>
Content-Length: 1712
Lines: 46


la lojbab cusku di'e

>loi prenu cu jitfa tavla fi loi tercinse
>Everybody lies about sex.

I have some comments about this one:

1- I think {loi prenu} is "some people", not "everybody", but
even if it does mean {piro loi prenu}, I still don't think we want
a mass here, because presumably we are not talking about
one collective lie but each person making their own special
lie about sex.

2- I think {tolstace} is a better translation for "lying" than
{jitfa tavla}. It is possible to lie without saying anything
false, and it is also possible to say something false and not
be lying.

3- I might understand something like:

            ro prenu cu tolstace fi le nu gletu
            Everybody lies about the sexual act.

but what does it mean to lie about masculinity/femininity/homosexuality/
heterosexuality? Is that what {tercinse} is? Does it mean that everybody
lies about their own/other people's sexuality? In fact, how is the predicate
{cinse} supposed to be used? Is this right:

            le nanmu cu cinse le nu gletu kei le ka nakni
            The man in the activity of having sexual intercourse
            exhibits maleness.

If that's correct, wouldn't {le se cinse} be a more likely topic to lie
about
rather than {le te cinse}? i.e., the act rather than the property displayed
in the act?

co'o mi'e xorxes