Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.15.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.15.18;
Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] Lojban attempt: please correct
To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
References: <BL2PR01MB37034F50C80696A81BB8FBCEB620@BL2PR01MB370.prod.exchangelabs.com>
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <55DCC93B.2050206@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 21:59:55 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BL2PR01MB37034F50C80696A81BB8FBCEB620@BL2PR01MB370.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
X-Spam_score: -1.7
X-Spam_score_int: -16
X-Spam_bar: -
Content-Length: 2812

la'o me. Timothy Lawrence .me cusku di'e:
> I posted my Lojban attempt on #ckule yesterday:
>
> 	.za'a lo bangu cu tolxregau ma'a.i
> 	.ja'o lo nu remna cu gumgau ma'a.i
> 	.ei ma'a cilre ma'a

I think you are confused about the function of the "." dot 
character/letter. Its function is *not* to start a sentence.

The dot {.} is a consonant (pronounced as a glottal stop (or pause)). It 
precedes words that (would otherwise) begin with a vowel, e.g. {.au}, 
{.arbaleta}, and also the word {.i}.

The word {.i} is the sentence separator, not the dot.

> Could someone correct it? I was trying to say the following:
>
> 	(I observe that) language separates you and me.
> 	(I deduce that) humanity unites you and me.
> 	We must learn one another.

There are a lot of possible ways to translate this depending on the 
exact meaning of the words. E.g. is "language" an agentive cause or 
separation or not? What sense of humanity is intended? Who is "we"? Etc etc.

One option:

za'a lo bangu cu te sepli do mi
.i ja'o lo ka xendo cu te jorne do mi
.i mi'o nitcu lo ka simxu lo ka tadni

(you could also use {simxu lo ka cilre} if you really wanted; the whole 
text is highly metaphorical anyway, but {mi cilre do} does sound a bit 
odd to most Lojbanists)

If you can answer the above questions then I can do another translation. 
My translation was just a wild guess.

> Does "ja'o" definitely translate to "therefore"? Because I wasn't
> intending on using it to link the two sentences.

It marks your sentence as a conclusion, but it doesn't have to be the 
conclusion of the previous sentence.

> A few more questions:
>
> - How does one say "Does that make any sense?" in Lojban? - How does
> one say "How does one say (English) in Lojban?" in Lojban?

Yet again there are many options...

{xu smudra} -- "Is [it] semantically correct?"

{xu do te smuni di'u lo cizra} -- "Do you understand the previous 
utterance as having a strange meaning?"


And for the second one you can use either of the following:

{ma xe fanva zoi gy. <English> .gy lo jbobau} -- "What's the translation 
result of <English> into Lojban?"

{ma noi lojbo cu smudu'i zoi gy. <English> .gy [gi'e lojbo]} -- "What 
Lojban expression has the same meaning as <English>?"

I like the second one because it doesn't involve an agent (fanva1). The 
first one is the old-school way.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.