From lojban+bncCOib25n_BhDjm9LtBBoE8PKZvg@googlegroups.com Sun Apr 24 13:54:15 2011 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QE6Ji-0002e6-6a; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:54:14 -0700 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14sf2731281fxm.16 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=AE33l/KrjznFxLx0RfDi5+k5mp78e2eq9iU5HDbjxIE=; b=Rgw2uOX8h/ZfFOlp4mSj/CVJaNXLRIOwgKHv1r4Te2XlOPkGLWl5rDWN4rq715VR9A J/tHuLCIsOYJUmWpxoV43hpJ+pC4sf27kNXg/6hVuyOw83gVTgdq8IV1BjZg2zDtbZ9V 7tUubiQ5yHye1hVrzqAV41SNbvr5Bgb+Iw2tM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=flMWn/aQD24wrYzaKIOT9aa7DfLcsA48nAibf8Hl/XdPHVgp+PA5le4egV1QpV84el IBlhyMhWYb4gMibcG2gOQwk4+U7qBTqxjMcFoHL2q1jLHU8qpm2kTEZumbZWAGObp5W9 cAnPTgXO7glThBUVeodkemMrX+/HrCQkswNvM= Received: by 10.223.81.195 with SMTP id y3mr821339fak.43.1303678435665; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:55 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.128.88 with SMTP id j24ls655906bks.0.gmail; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.201.1 with SMTP id ey1mr236870bkb.10.1303678434256; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.201.1 with SMTP id ey1mr236869bkb.10.1303678434195; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f52.google.com (mail-bw0-f52.google.com [209.85.214.52]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o19si906492bkw.7.2011.04.24.13.53.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.52; Received: by mail-bw0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 24so2121021bwj.39 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.154.73 with SMTP id n9mr2283931bkw.178.1303678433998; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.57.137 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:53:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3eb6a3fe-db0e-4b7e-bd78-c81e73aad058@u12g2000prn.googlegroups.com> References: <3eb6a3fe-db0e-4b7e-bd78-c81e73aad058@u12g2000prn.googlegroups.com> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 16:53:53 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] multilingual lovesong From: ".arpis." To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: rpglover64@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rpglover64@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rpglover64@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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cd184f5b77404a1b049fa --0015175cd184f5b77404a1b049fa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A few comments: {djica sanga} is "want type-of sing", which would be better used to mean something like "desirously sing"; {sanga djica} is probably better at expressing "want to sing", or an explicit {djica lo nu sanga}. I'm not sure why the {da} in the first bridi is there; should it be {do}? And I'm not sure what the {da} in the second bridi is doing there either. As far as I can tell, the {iu} at the end is fine; it attaches to {do}, which works perfectly in context. On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, nilcefas wrote: > coi rodo > > lately, i have been to a performance by "bodo wartke", a german "musik- > kabarettist". one of his pieces features a short love-poem, which he > translated into over eighty languages so far. these include conlangs > such as esperanto, quenya and klingon, but lojban is still missing. so > i made an effort to translate it with my rudimentary lojban-skills. > that's why i'd be glad if anyone could look through my translation... > > the german original goes as follows: > > >> ich will's in allen sprachen f=FCr dich singen, auf allen instrumenten= zum > erklingen bringen: ich liebe dich > > his english translation is not quite exact, but is probably better in > terms of versification: > > >> i want to sing in every language for you, baby, and play on every > instrument to say these words to you: believe me, it is true - i love you > > however, my attempt in lojban is based on the german original: > > >> ni'o mi djica sanga bau ro bangu da .i mi se sance sepi'o ro zgitci da > .i mi prami do .iu > > jbofi'e tells me, that this is grammatical, but is it "good lojban" > too? especially the construction with the two "da" seems a little > strange to me (although it might be practical, because it provides a > sort of rhyme). i would like to include the ".iu" at the very end of > the verse, because these emotional indicators are such a unique > feature of lojban - unless, of course, this should sound too awkward. > > i'd appreciate any ideas on this. also, if anyone has a translation, > that would fit better in the given meter or with a better rhyme, that > would be great! here's a link to the song: > > http://youtu.be/J2UBXB4IhZM > > thanks in advance! > > nils > > -- > 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=3Den. > > --=20 mu'o mi'e .arpis. --=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. --0015175cd184f5b77404a1b049fa Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A few comments:

{djica sanga} is "want type-of sing", whic= h would be better used to mean something like "desirously sing"; = {sanga djica} is probably better at expressing "want to sing", or= an explicit {djica lo nu sanga}.
I'm not sure why the {da} in the first bridi is there; should it be {do= }?
And I'm not sure what the {da} in the second bridi is doing there= either.

As far as I can tell, the {iu} at the end is fine; it attac= hes to {do}, which works perfectly in context.

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 3:51 PM, nilcefas <nils.schaef= fer@gmail.com> wrote:
coi rodo

lately, i have been to a performance by "bodo wartke", a german &= quot;musik-
kabarettist". one of his pieces features a short love-poem, which he translated into over eighty languages so far. these include conlangs
such as esperanto, quenya and klingon, but lojban is still missing. so
i made an effort to translate it with my rudimentary lojban-skills.
that's why i'd be glad if anyone could look through my translation.= ..

the german original goes as follows:

>> ich will's in allen sprachen f=FCr dich singen, auf allen inst= rumenten zum erklingen bringen: ich liebe dich

his english translation is not quite exact, but is probably better in
terms of versification:

>> i want to sing in every language for you, baby, and play on every = instrument to say these words to you: believe me, it is true - i love you
however, my attempt in lojban is based on the german original:

>> ni'o mi djica sanga bau ro bangu da .i mi se sance sepi'o = ro zgitci da .i mi prami do .iu

jbofi'e tells me, that this is grammatical, but is it "good lojban= "
too? especially the construction with the two "da" seems a little=
strange to me (although it might be practical, because it provides a
sort of rhyme). i would like to include the ".iu" at the very end= of
the verse, because these emotional indicators are such a unique
feature of lojban - unless, of course, this should sound too awkward.

i'd appreciate any ideas on this. also, if anyone has a translation, that would fit better in the given meter or with a better rhyme, that
would be great! here's a link to the song:

http://youtu.be/J= 2UBXB4IhZM

thanks in advance!

nils

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o mi'= e .arpis.

--
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.
--0015175cd184f5b77404a1b049fa--