On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 02:30:52PM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
Would you prefer
— .i lo nolraitru cu ponse nagi'e turni .i mutce frica
— .i ma do prali lo nu do ponse lo tarci
to be _read_ as:
or b)
.i «lu lo nolraitru cu ponse nagi'e turni .i mutce frica li'u»
.i «lu ma do prali lo nu do ponse lo tarci li'u»
How does this solve your problem?
It still doesn't properly indicate a speaker change and adds additional
words. I don't see any reason to prefer that to your other proposal.
If you want to indicate the speaker change, you should do it properly with something
like {sei ny cusku} and that would add a bulk of text not present in the original.
a)
.i lo nolraitru cu ponse nagi'e turni .i mutce frica
.i ma do prali lo nu do ponse lo tarci
(that is, no indication of speaker change whatsoever)
I agree with iesk here: If you write down a stream of spoken text,
you should also include voice hints:
<serious low-pitched voice> .i lo nolraitru cu ponse nagi'e turni .i mutce frica
<ignorant child voice> .i ma do prali lonu do ponse lo tarci
Now, there _is_ an indication of speaker change.