[lojban] Re: A comment on one of my jboselkei translations

["Jorge Llambías" <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On 3/22/06, Betsemes <betsemes@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a question. I was under the impression that when we add a spatial
> tense followed by a sumti, we are really adding a tense sumti that applies
> to the entire bridi. So I thought that here {pa'o} applied to the event of
> seeing instead of applying to just one of the sumtis (the girl); and I was
> under the impression that in order for it to apply to the girl, it should
> have been written as {mi viska lo lunbe nixli pe pa'o lo canko be lo ragve
> dinju ca le cabycerni} thus associating the tense directly to the sumti. How
> is this incorrect?

You are correct, the reviewer is wrong. I also got a few "corrections" that
were obviously wrong for some of my translations, but supposedly these
things will smooth themselves out with time. It would be nice to be able
to add some comments to the reviewers comments so that they don't
get the last word though. :)

> I also didn't think that a past tense tag was necessary because of the {ca
> le cabycerni} tense sumti. Am I wrong?

It's extremely difficult to judge whether a tense indication is necessary
with such out of context sentences. I wouldn't deduct points for that, but
it's a valid comment. "This morning" could be now, or even in the future.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.