Re: [lojban] la .alis.

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Michael Everson
<michael.everson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 Mar 2010, at 01:54, Jorge Llambías wrote:
>
>> I don't think the translation has many of those though. Maybe one
>> (intentional) grammatical error, though I don't now remember exactly
>> where.
>
> Curiouser and curiouser" is the intentional error that comes to mind.
>
> 'Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice (she was so much surprised, that for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English).
>
> i lu cizra je za’uzra sei la alis krixa to abu tai se spaji ja’e le nu ze’a tolmorji le nu ta’i makau tavla bau le drani lojbo toi.

The Lojban is grammatical though, it just uses a fu'ivla that looks
patterned like ci-zra, za'u-zra, which is not really a meaningful
Lojban pattern. (I wouldn't say the English is quite ungrammatical
either.)

I think the intentionally ungrammatical bit I was thinking of is this:

 'I quite agree with you,' said the Duchess; 'and the moral of that
is—"Be what you would seem to be"—or if you'd like it put more
simply—"Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might
appear to others that what you were or might have been was not
otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be
otherwise."'

i lu mi do ja'asai tugni sei le noltroni'u cu cusku i la'e di'u
madni'i la'e lu ko ckaji le se simlu be do li'u i va'i sa'u lu ko
noroi se xanri le nu do na ckaji na'eboda poi do simlu fi lei drata fe
le ka de poi do ca'a ja nu'o ckaji ke'a na drata di poi do simlu ke'a
lei drata lo drata li'u li'u

I've no idea whether the English is grammatical, but I think the Lojban is.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.