[lojban-beginners] Re: The Prophet

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 8/7/07, komfo,amonan <komfoamonan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would argue, without much fervor, that the reason is aesthetic/stylistic.
> The original is not written in everyday language, hence, neither should the
> translation.

If {za'i nonkansa} is preferred over {nu nonkansa}, then for consistency
one should also use {za'i cortu} rather than {nu cortu}. One problem is that
for some reason people don't like translating English -ness with {nu}, even
though it ought to be the normal translation.

English has:

adjective + -ness/-ity -> noun
verb + -ing/-tion -> noun

but Lojban doesn't distinguish verbs and adjectives, and {nu} is what
normally corresponds in both cases. Neither {za'i} nor {ka} should be
the automatic translation of -ness.

> OTOH, xorxes's point about za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e is so well-taken
> that I wonder whether they could be, erm, excised from the language.

I wouldn't miss them, though I would say there are other more malignant
cmavo that should be taken care of first. :)

> OTOH,
> does anyone know if there's a particular language or language family that is
> the source or inspiration of those four cmavo?

I don't think so, something like this is a more likely origin:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_aspect>

mu'o mi'e xorxes