[lojban-beginners] Re: Debug my propaganda?

["Turniansky, Michael" <MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org [mailto:lojban-beginners-
> bounce@lojban.org] On Behalf Of Karl Naylor
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:52 AM
> To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
> Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: Debug my propaganda?
> 
> On 19/03/07, Turniansky, Michael <MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com>
wrote:
> 
> I've deleted a lot of your comments that I agree with, so the ones
> that are left are the ones I'm less sure on...
> 
> > > pavo jeftu cu temci lenu mi co'a tadni la lojban.
> > pavo jeftu means 14 one-week periods.  Also, since jeftu already
talks
> > about an event in the x1 place, you might like this:
> 
> I think what I was actually after was "pavo se jeftu cu temci ...";
> "something that is 14 weeks in duration is the time period..."
> 
   But you don't need the temci part at all because the x1 of jeftu IS
something that is x2 weeks in duration....  (also, it's important not to
leave out the li in front of a number that is used as an argument)



> > >.i .au da'i su'o pendo be mi cu bazi co'a tadni
> >    I think it's okay, but I'm not sure if the da'i adds much to it.
> 
> I wanted something like "I wish you would" rather than "I hope you
> will" (since they're not actually likely to learn; I'm just having a
> bit of fun really).  Is that the effect of {da'i}?

  da'i is unfortunately a bit slippery, but as I understand it basically
is equivalent to the subjunctive voice in English ("If wishes were
horses, beggars would rise"), to discuss hypothetical situations,
although I'm not sure what it adds to the language that constructions
like naja, et. al don't already provide.  I hope some jbocertu will let
us both know.

> 
> > >.i seri'abo da'i mi'a ka'e tavla bau la lojban. vau  .ui
> >   Yes, you want mu'i ot seri'a here, because you are talking about
why
> > _you want_ them to learn it.  Here, you probably do want to use
casnu,
> 
> Well, not quite.  This sentence is meant to be a consequence of my
> friends learning Lojban, not of my desire for them to do so -- I was
> thinking that the {ri'a} would not care about the {.au} in the last
> sentence.  Does it or doesn't it?
> 

  Well, yes, it is true that their learning lojban would cause them to
be be capable of conversing with you in lojban.  Your English
translation just gave me the opinion that the "because" you wanted was
one of desire, not stating cause and effect.

> > language piece in it). The vau is not needed in either case.
> 
> I think it is.  I'm happy about the hypothetical event that I speak
> Lojban with my friends, not about Lojban itself (in this case,
> anyway).  Without the {vau}, {.ui} would attach only to "la lojban.",
> no?

  Ah.   Well, I think it still only attaches to la lojban, because
that's the only thing the vau closes off (I may be wrong here, I'll have
to go back and check).  I would have probably put the ui after the
seri'abo myself.
 
>
> > > .i zo'o mi dapma le rodo ka tolcando
> >   Ungrammatical.  You want either .i zo'o mi dapma le le rodo ka
> > tolcando (you damn the property being busy of all of your audience)
or
> > .i zo'o mi dapma ro le do ka tolcando (you damn the entire quantity
of
> > being busy of your audience).  Not sure which you are going for
here...
> 
> My reasoning was that {do} does not take an article, as it is a
> pro-sumti.  However, I'm unclear on whether {ro} when used with a
> pro-sumti tries to add an implicit {lo} as it would with a selbri.  I
> wanted "I damn the (property of being busy) which is associated with
> all of you".  "le rodo" looks very strange to me, are you sure?
> 

  It does, but you can't use the shortcut expressing of "pe" with a
quantifier without the gadri.  "le le pa danlu ku mamta" (the mother of
one of the animals) is fine, "le pa le danlu ku mamta" or "le pa danlu
ku mamta" is not (well, actually,  grammatically, they are fine, but
mean  "the one of the animals is a mother" and "the one animal is a
mother" respectively, rather than "the mother of one of the animals")


> Alternatively, what about "le ka tolcando pe rodo"?
> 
  Yes, that's fine.