In a message dated 6/11/2001 11:56:00 AM Central Daylight Time,
ragnarok@pobox.com writes: I disagree. I have studied alchemical theory at length and my understanding Interesting and quite plausible, whether for puddler or High Art, but it doesn't fit this passage very well. I can't find any of my copies (lost in some move or other or just misfiled somewhere?) so I can't check other translations to get a better fix on the original. The "for" is the problem: if it is purposive, then something along the line I suggested seems called for; if it is explanatory, then the grammar is wrong. In the latter case, {mintu} would probably be better than {dunli}. Maybe that is why Robin CA required the things to be translated into Lojban be originally in English. |