From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDgt8rkBBoEkc2PKw@googlegroups.com Thu Sep 16 15:36:34 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OwN49-0004UQ-Br; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:34 -0700 Received: by wwe15 with SMTP id 15sf504394wwe.16 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8dBouSiQ7LCPViMPWX5Aq9v5HTuXynQB5247z/G22rY=; b=vg1LqzoKrr0vy2ijmfCTVOQph9hvkcyEkD/ZP2Y3Bda59L/I6svU36VTgM8oRnf3jD xrSSfxxnLU6+1cPude3ICLEBOQrd3vdhWc6xyeg17TaRa0+U8Y/UWgX44mJ3S8CvEX+Q vWux6Ojpj4RYz98mGy1Jhs/Xu7Z/8/oTPR4UA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=NHgoLuWarnyWoMWgQaZXGKasxKeCV3f9zsS90mIVTmIMoCQKzv5KG39fbmBLaYXLns Y2iSb8cgzNuVrvqF5vhrd1gcrPf9A9K6hHVpijyi9bbV4JfZjgf4yANTMJteZVPIdaTk +oc6croCS7Qa9G9fVmHOG8E5V+wFWHO8gpdx4= Received: by 10.216.145.214 with SMTP id p64mr938916wej.27.1284676576838; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.198.162 with SMTP id v34ls1192376wen.3.p; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.36.137 with SMTP id w9mr1047wea.0.1284676575527; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.36.137 with SMTP id w9mr1046wea.0.1284676575514; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f171.google.com (mail-wy0-f171.google.com [74.125.82.171]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id m11si1125172wej.7.2010.09.16.15.36.14; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:14 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.171; Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35so876160wyb.30 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.137.199 with SMTP id x7mr3430152wbt.107.1284676574363; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.151.203 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:36:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <575987.94184.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <729457.38076.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C8DF3A5.3040702@lojban.org> <364433.94354.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <575987.94184.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:36:14 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: other-centric UI From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John E Clifford wro= te: > And for 1? =A0These are not, after all, translations but rather part of a= n effort > to teach and justify a new usage. =A0One expects such to be fdone with re= levant > care. Not everyone is consciously aware of such linguistic subtleties, so the fault was not necessarily carelessness. >=A0As you not, acceptable translations that make the point are easily come > by (I am a little uncertain about 'yay for Mom', which doesn't seems more= to > applaud than co-rejoice, but that is aesthetics). =A0As I said, 1 does no= t obvious > lends itself to even these explanations, Which is why one has to resort to a not-fully-adequate paraphrase. How would you translate "uu" in English? Given that, we can probably find some better way to translate "uu dai" and "uu da'oi ...". Maybe something like: la .selkik. .uu da'oi .lindar. cu co'e "Selkik ('poor thing!' would say Lindar) does something." but that's not very idiomatic and still doesn't get it quite right. Maybe English is just incapable of doing it so succintly as Lojban in this case. That's a translation problem, not a problem with the Lojban. > but does -- like the rest of them, fit > in with a propositional interpretation, which is also fairly regularly me= ntioned > subliminally (it is hard to talk overtly about some things in Lojspeak) i= n > earlier comments in this ane earlier related topic. If your point is that Lojbanists are not always accomplished linguists, I a= gree. If your point is that "da'oi" is somehow against the spirit of Lojban, I disagree. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.