From lojban+bncCIGHwM2rDhCP0vXkBBoEW9pp7A@googlegroups.com Fri Sep 24 20:14:38 2010 Received: from mail-pw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OzLDf-0006oL-FW; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:38 -0700 Received: by pwj6 with SMTP id 6sf1203966pwj.16 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:30 -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:received:received:date:from:to :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-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-disposition; bh=RZ8ADay961tfLdLimRrlIvggqICj7iSgn8vbgKR0f/Q=; b=nw455jGEwWqK0i5XUdvhwHARpuXdKIIL86N0ANrMvxR8GEFqQsZXVes9lVV2ijwe9F VEEBz3E3jb6GtqwS4iQWb3IDID4sPAqUwF6pUiFIIVUGzwNN+lLb2jSQR+zWVFJswxgb nGRPOYg0lkotKhN4DI/RQqZIYnBVH5XzQdACY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-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-disposition; b=zlsNIMlUf9iAwxqkXi6LaEHaZH+iIRcCuW7eP1COzfVABoI/98n/nt+uXfOpHNXI1g cO5DUVRxcjjhWLLsdCC7Xpr4vZOyfBnC+6pM0Kt42HaC8iEQWnfYjBNbyxxLCqDcORrQ GFioAXU/c3UwimpcJ9AwPbX2QBSVecw5NAbOE= Received: by 10.142.3.26 with SMTP id 26mr266357wfc.26.1285384463354; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.194.14 with SMTP id r14ls1358649wff.2.p; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.212.11 with SMTP id k11mr983443wfg.12.1285384462892; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.212.11 with SMTP id k11mr983442wfg.12.1285384462847; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pw0-f42.google.com (mail-pw0-f42.google.com [209.85.160.42]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id e3si3280485wfh.3.2010.09.24.20.14.22; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.85.160.42 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) client-ip=209.85.160.42; Received: by pwj10 with SMTP id 10so505767pwj.29 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.128.19 with SMTP id a19mr528294wfd.220.1285384462601; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunflowerriver.org (c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net [68.35.167.179]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y36sm3171269wfd.18.2010.09.24.20.14.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:14:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 21:14:18 -0600 From: Alan Post To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: nu pa moi se nunkei la'e lu lo do ckiku ma zvati li'u lu'u Message-ID: <20100925031418.GE18705@alice.local> References: <20100925023935.GA18705@alice.local> <20100925024322.GB18705@alice.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: alanpost@sunflowerriver.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 209.85.160.42 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of alanpost@sunflowerriver.org) smtp.mail=alanpost@sunflowerriver.org 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-Disposition: inline On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 09:10:19PM -0600, Jonathan Jones wrote: > Where I'm quoted as saying { .i.ienai mi skami nu surla .i ri gunka}, I > meant to say {na surla}. > > Again, me. At { .i.uacai.ui .i ko'a rokci .i ko'e grana} the {.i} in {.i > ko'a} shouldn't be there. > > This one isn't really a grammar issue: At { .i.iecu'i naja'a go'i .i xu do > djica}, the {naja'a} was me trying to say, basically, "I'm cool either > way". I couldn't find a midpoint cmavo between {na} and {ja'a}. > > {.i ca ko'a goi lo rokci pe mi .ije ko'e goi lo grana pe do} is a few > lines early. I said it after you said {.i mi dunda ko'a do .ije do dunda > ko'e mi} but before you said {.i mi lebna lo rokci pe mi do}, because > after the transfer of possession the {pe} was reversed. (Which also means > that {lo rokci pe mi} should've been {pe do}. :) ) > Oh right, I meant to ask you about that, because I saw you modeling that in the game. I originally used "pe do" and "pe mi" because I wanted to translate the sentence: "I have your stick" I need some way to say "I posses this stick which you own." (or the inverse, "I own the stick which you posses.") I thought that "pe" could be used in this way, so I could say: {.i mi ponse lo grana pe do} and mean "I have your stick." Is there a better way to express this? It has certainly be the most difficult issue I've had translating material. -Alan -- .i ko djuno fi le do sevzi -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.