Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Let's do something like this for Lojban!

[Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>]

On 3 March 2012 15:30, Remo Dentato <rdentato@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/3/3 Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>:
>> I suggest starting with
>>
>> 2. mi me la .clalis.
>
> Why not simply {mi'e la .clalis} ?
> BTW, {clalis} doesn't have the same sound of the orginal that is (if I
> understood correctly) roughly equivalent to the Chinese "Chen Li" I'd
> prefer {tcenlis}
>

The straightforward and realistic sentence would be {mi'e .clalis.},
I just considered that paralleling 2 and 3 helps understanding the
sentence structure in 3 (as 2 and 4 in the original).

This is the burden of translating an introduction to a different language.

>> 3. ta me la .djan.
> This seems a good place to assign {ko'a} -> 3. ta goi ko'a me la .djan.
>

Just consider how hard it is to figure out the sentence structure at
first sight.
Firstly, it is too long and too dissimilar from nearby sentences. Secondly, the
concept of assignment is highly unexpected. To introduce it via illustrated
examples, I would dedicate a whole sequence of examples to that single
concept and employ at least one reassignment.

Furthermore, when do you expect to use {ko'a} again? The girl is pointing
all the time. And, in particular, in 16, she is talking to a guy who was absent
in 3.

>> 4. zo .djan. cmene ta
> I would use the lujvo {selme'e} -> 4. ko'a selme'e zo .djan.
> This would avoid using {se}, I agree it's too early, the nintandi
> would not know about the relationship between {selme'e} and {cmene},
> they would just guess it means "is named".
>

That is fine. But why are you avoiding the gismu?

>> Also, I recommend using the ti-series in place of the ko'a-series.
> Not sure. I would prefer introducing {ko'a} and friends.
>

It is nice to introduce {ko'a}, but, as I said, that is infeasible without
a dedicated story, or at such an early point of this one.

>> Using the latter while pointing can cause so much confusion...
>>
>> In 12 we may do
>> 12. lo prenu cu zvati tu
>
> My preference would be {vuku ko'e goi tu zvati}
>
> Using {tu} as zvati2 seems too prone to ambiguity. At least it should
> be {lovu} so that it is clear you're talking about "there yonder".
>

Wouldn't the roles of zvati1 and zvati2 be clear from 10 and 11?
Similarly, isn't it clear from the green circles that they are talking about
position?

To me, once you know {mi} or {do} you can figure out the sentence
structure right away, which in this case would show the reader the
flexibility of lojban demonstratives.

ta'o zo'o Here is an alternative:
10. vi me mi
11. va me do
12. vu prenu

mu'o
mi'e .asiz,

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.