Re: [lojban] Re: other-centric UI

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Here are some signs that what is intended here is not expressions of empathetic
> emotions (etc.)
> 1.  show no signs that the speaker, whoever that may be, shares Lindar's pity.
> It is translated by a non-restrictive relative clause.
> 2.  Ditto, though here I suppose this could be a sharing, but the translation
> appears to rule that out.
> 3.  Ditto.  Here, of course, the speaker has no grounds for even displaced
> pride, given the conditions on pride.  Maybe happiness or some such.  But that
> is not what is indicated nor how the whole is translated.
> 4.  Ditto.  Again no signs of empathy, nothing expressive, just a relative
> clause.
> Did I mention that relative clauses are the wrong sort of things to be here?

Right, you are complaining about the sloppy English translations.
I suggest these translations instead:

   lo verba .ui da'oi mamta cu kelci
   "The kid (yay for mom!) is playing."

   do finti lo melbi .o'a da'oi do
   "You made something beautiful (go you!)."

    lo mlatu cu citka lo kukte .oi da'oi cipni
    "The cat eats something delicious (ouch for the bird!)."

So yes, the English translations were poor (and I'm not claiming mine
are ideal, they just highlight the particular issue you are looking at
more). That does not invalidate the Lojban though, it just shows that
translation is hard.

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.