[lojban-beginners] Re: quoting several words?

[m.kornig@sondal.net]

Selon Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:

> On 7/20/07, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7/20/07, m.kornig@sondal.net <m.kornig@sondal.net> wrote:
> >
> > > {zo maik cmene mi} "I'm Mike" or
> > > {zo rut cmene ti} "This is Ruth".
>
> I think {cmene} is fine for introducing yourself or someone else,

Thanks for this clarification, Jorge.

> and
> {mi'e} is not so good for that, because the primary function of {mi'e}
> is to identify the speaker, not to introduce a suitable label for the
> speaker. (In English, it's more like "it's me, Mike" as an answer to
> "who is it?" than like "I'm Mike" as an answer to "who are you?".)
>
> Having said that, I realize that my problem with the above sentences
> is not so much the use of {cmene} for introductions, as the choice of
> English translation.
>
> {zo maik cmene mi} "My name is 'Mike'"
> {mi me la maik} "I'm Mike"
>
> {zo rut cmene ti} "Her name is 'Ruth'"
> {ti me la rut} "This is Ruth"/"She's Ruth"
>
> The difference between "my name is Mike" and "I'm Mike" might seem
> trivial, and they might be interchangeable in most contexts, but if
> "my name is Mike" is just as idiomatic as "I'm Mike", and it is more
> accurate, I'd go with the accurate translation. This is because in Lojban,
> the difference between use and mention of a name is important. When you
> use the name, it's {la maik}, when you mention it, it's {zo maik}.
> Translating
> a case of mention in Lojban, {zo maik cmene mi}, with a case of use in
> English, "I'm Mike", blurs the distinction and that's probably not a good
> idea in a course for beginners.

I see your point and will change this.

Martin
developing the e-learning at http://www.sondal.net/lojban/