From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Feb  5 16:14:00 2000
X-Digest-Num: 355
Message-ID: <44114.355.1935.959273826@eGroups.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2000 16:14:00 PST
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Translation needed
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 1935

la adam cusku di'e

> > i lei selsabji cu selcmi loi xamgu tsiju e loi mapti tutci
> > e lo nu ka'e cpacu lo djacu i loi cmalu nu xagze'a fa loi
> > cange tadji e loi cidja sorcu tadji cu sidju ji'a
> >
>
>The x2 of cmima is a set, so it should be "le'i selsabji".

{cmima} is also defined as "x1 belongs to group x2". It goes
against my principles to use sets, since I find that they
don't add anything to what can be done with masses, and
they're likely to be used in places where they should't be.
Is the sentence with {lei selsabji} any less clear than
what it would be with {le'i selsabji}? Is there any possible
difference in meaning?

>It's not
>critical, but I would also say something like "le'i di'u selsabji" to
>translate "these resources".

Ok about {di'u}.

>I'm not sure whether 'cmalu' can apply to non-physical things, but I
>suppose it probably should be able to. As a (probably not very
>satisfactory) alternative, you could put something like "li piso'u" in
>the x4 of xagze'a, which by my calculation is the x3 of zenba.

I never know what to do with "amount" places. Using
pure numbers there is an interesting idea.

co'o mi'e xorxes


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com