DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=mGjInte/PeHBWTwq2nR3zeqAVLHwGNau9DXeC3ULEiNATUj3DY/KNUVNgnVfegw77GWdi98haTK44NlhKBhDZNjHUm15aKX4f38NTCfeIs4HearyqNqr6xJQGrEeugqrflf2uqxmZDhDVfHE7lnQgS5ZYd8pjPK1XtWZ7rhl/uo=
Message-ID: <925d1756050927131566a71aca@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:15:19 -0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Converting Quotable Names
In-Reply-To: <a7e887a7feef.a7feefa7e887@southeast.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <a7e887a7feef.a7feefa7e887@southeast.rr.com>
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org
Content-Length: 2161

On 9/27/05, thgarris@nc.rr.com <thgarris@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> These answers are very helpful, but given the Sitting Bull example,
> couldn't you translate "Rite of Spring" to {la ritli pe vensa}.

You could, but I think there is a subtle difference.
In the case of Sitting Bull, there is no sitting bull, it
is just a name. In the case of the Rite of Spring the
title may actually refer to a rite of spring (this is even
more clear in the Hitchhiker's Guide case).

Anyway, probably nobody would object if you use
{la ritli pe vensa}.

>  Maybe
> I'm misunderstanding the other parts of {la'e lu lo ritli pe lo vensa
> li'u}, so I'll walk through my understanding just so someone can correct
> me if I'm wrong.  The {lu} and {li'u} are quoting a proper name.

Just quoting the words. {lu ... li'u} is for any kind of citation
as long as what is quoted is grammatical Lojban text.
{la'e} takes you to the thing referred to by those words.

> So if
> I were to say I heard "Rite of Spring", I would use {lu} and {li'u}, but
> if I were writing the program for the concert, I'd leave them out.

I'd do that, but I'm not sure there is a firm convention about
this.

> {lo}
> would be indicating that I am refering to the actual season of Spring
> and the actual Rites associated with it, and not just the generalized
> concepts of springiness and rituals.  If a native Lojbanist were writing
> the title on his score, would we use {lo}, or leave that to context?

{ritli pe lo vensa} is not grammatical though, because {pe}
attaches {lo vensa} to another sumti, so it has to be
{lo ritli pe lo vensa}, whether quoted or not.

> Now, as to a native Lojbanist, would we use {pe} or just {vensa ritli}
> (with or without the {lo}s)?

Yes, that's a possibility too.

> And for that matter, would we just build a
> cmene: {vensa.ritlis} (though he may use rafsi)?

{vensa.ritlis} is not a cmene, the first part is a gismu.
A cmene can consist of more than one word, but they
all must end in a consonant, so {vensaritlis} or
{vensyritlis}, or {vensas.ritlis.}, or ... But I wouldn't do
any of that when retaining the meaning of the words is
important.

mu'o mi'e xorxes