Re: Hello! and some questions...

["Jorge J. Llambías" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

>In any case, I am wondering if this list is an appropriate place to
>post my attempts to write and translate in lojban.

Yes, very appropriate!

Here are my comments on your translation.

>The last word
>Is spoken for you;

>le fanmo valsi
>zu'o bacru krati do

Does the English mean that someone else speaks the last word
for you? If so, then you'd have to say something like:

    da krati do le nu bacru le fanmo valsi
    "Someone stands for you in uttering the last word."

or some such variation. I'm not sure exactly what you meant.
The way you have it, it is just one sumti, not a full bridi.
I would have thought it meant something more like:

    le fanmo valsi ba'o se bacru sera'a do
    "The last word is already spoken concerning you."

But I don't really understand the passage, so I'm not very sure.

>The time of light and dark pair by pair:

>.i ca'o le gusni jo'u le manku remei ku

That would be read as: ca'o (le gusni) jo'u (le manku remei)

(Actually as it stands it is not grammatical, because you need
an explicit  {ku} after {gusni}, but that's a minor mistake.)

Again, I don't exactly know what to make of  that "pair by pair" in
English. My guess would be that it's talking about day and night,
that come always in a pair, always one pair after another,
so I might try:

        i ca'o ro krefu be le gusni ku joi le manku
        "During every repetition of the light and the dark."

>Born of the same lineage, they share the knowledge,

>mivbi'o fi le pa rinka zu'o leza'i djuno fatri

What is the x3 of {mivbi'o}?
In any case, that is not a sentence as it stands. Something
seems to be missing between {rinka} and {zu'o}.
I would say:

        i ca le nu mivbi'o cu dunsi'u le ka klesi
        iseki'ubo dunsi'u le ka djuno
        "When born, they are equal in class,
        and thus equal in what they know."

>Dying of different lineages, they're utterly separated.

>si'a mrobi'o fi le za'upa rinka zu'o jicmu cliva

Again, the same problem. My suggestion:

      i ca le nu mrobi'o cu ficysi'u le ka klesi
      iseki'ubo traji le ka sepsi'u
      "When dying, they are different in class,
      and thus extremely separated."

>Utterly separated--

>.i jicmu cliva

i sepsi'u traji

>Even Yellow Head [Buddha] and Blue Eyes [Bodhidharma] have yet to
>        discern.


>je'u la pelstedu .e la blakanla puze'e na'e sanji

Perhaps {la pelselstedu} and {la blaselkanla} are better. At least
they make more sense as literal descriptions (yellow-headed
and blue-eyed).

>South, North, East, West, let us return--
>And in the depths of the night together look at the snow on the
>        thousand crags.

>.i.e'o roda ve'e se'ixru
>.ije ri catlu lei snime poi ke'a cpana le so'i cmanji'o ca ze'uca nicte

{ca ze'uca le nicte}. You need a sumti after the tag.

My translation:

    i e'u ne'u je be'a je du'a je vu'a mi'o xruti
    gi'e catlu ca le nicte condi le snime poi cpana le so'i ma'arji'o

{cmanji'o} is not correctly formed, it has to be {jmanyji'o}.
(4-letter rafsi must always be followed by "y")

You may object to {ca le nicte condi}, but {caze'uca le nicte} means
during the long night. I understand "in the depths of the night" more
as "far from the day" rhather than something like "during a long night".


>Some questions:
>1.  Tenses:  Twice in here I want to say that one thing occured when
>another thing occured.  This calls for sumti tcita, right?  In reading
>the book, it seems that sumti tcita *have* to come after the bridi,
>is this true?

No, they can come before or after the selbri, and they can be
before or after other sumti.

>4.  Line 6 seems tricky.  I used "puze'e na'e sanji" to mean "have
>yet to discern".  I take it to literally mean "forever up to now,
>not discerned", while leaving open the possibility (however remote!)
>of future discerning.  This seems analogous to "have yet to...",
>but I'm not completely confident in it, is there a better way?

I would say: {za'o na'e sanji}, "they keep not discerning", but
that's just me.

>My first attempt at the last two lines was this:
>
>doi lei snanu .e lei berti .e lei stuna .e lei stici .i.e'o pe'u
>        ma'a se'ixru
>gi'e lenu midju be le nicte cu jai ca fai ma'a catlu fe lei snime poi
>        ke'a cpana le panonono cmana jipno
>
>Is this an appropriate use of <jai> and <fai>?

No, you'd have to say {jai ca catlu fai ma'a}, or {fai ma'a jai ca catlu},
you can't put {fai ma'a} between the {jai ca} and the selbri.

But you don't need {fai} and {jai}. You can get the word order you
want simply as: {ca le nicte midju ma'a catlu le snime}.

>Also, does the first
>line here really mean "All of you to the south, to the north, to the
>east, and to the west, please let's return"?  I found this to clunky
>and tried ".i.e'o roda ve'e se'ixru" instead...

Yes, that would mean that the returning occurs everywhere.
(BTW, xruti means "x1 returns to x2" so se'i- is not necessary.

 > I think lojban is a
>language I actually *can* teach myself, more or less, and maybe I can
>even participate in the creation of stylistic conventions!

Yes, definitely. There's a lot to do yet in matters of style.
>
>Paul

co'o mi'e xorxes