[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] [oz] Assorted translation questions
la .asiz. cu cusku di'e
I should mention that I haven't read the original, though I am naturally
familiar with the general plot. Also, I am reading a version I
downloaded last year, soon after you announced the work.
If you can, you might want to download a new version. I have fixed over
100 typos since then.
Chapter 1
1. {lo zdāni cu kāndi gi'e grųsi kei du'i tu'a ro drāta};
Why the {tu'a}? To me, it is quite normal for dunli1 and dunli2 to be
simple objects.
This topic is one of my specialties. :D
I use BAI in such a way that whenever their source predicate has a sumti
place that could integrate the main bridi, then they will do so (I
explained the same thing in the {to'e ri'a} thread).
{du'i} is one such BAI. I define it thus:
broda du'i X ~= X dunli lo su'u broda
So, I would say, for example:
(1) do bajra du'i lo nu lo tirxu cu bajra
"Your run is like that of a tiger."
It is seldom the case that a concrete object is {dunli} to an
abstraction, although it is not impossible. But usually, replacing the X
in the above equation with a concrete object will create "non-sense".
But we can use {tu'a X} when we don't want to specify the full
abstraction, or when it's obvious.
(2) do bajra du'i tu'a lo tirxu
"You run like a tiger [runs]"
The expansion of this {tu'a X} is almost always {lo nu X no'a}, which
correspsonds to the English in []-brackets in (2).
2. {lo re da ca lo nu fa'a cātlu cu vėska lo cmālu bōxna};
Is {lo re da} any different from {lo re mei}?
Not really.
3. {la .tōtos. cu plėpe fi lo bėrka be dy gi'e sezymėpri ni'a lo ckāna};
Two things make me uneasy about the choice of {sezymipri}. Firstly,
because I think mipri2 would be {lo du'u vo'a zvati ma kau}. Secondly,
because I don't think there is any mipri3 to hide from in this
particular case.
He might be hiding from potential enemies/threats, who knows what the
dog is thinking. .u'i
What about {sezyselmragau}?
This word is a bit long, sadly, but I like the idea of "giving oneself
shelter". It's a shame that the {sez-____-gau} circumfix is so verbose.
It would be nice if it were shorter as it does occur somewhat
frequently. I'm going to go with your suggestion for now.
4. {bājra ru'u bu'u lo kųmfa fau lo nu zvāti nu'i ge ca pa da ti nu'u gi
ca pa de ta fau lo nu clādu cmōni};
4.1 Why you use {pa} instead of the elidable {su'o}? It seems to me that
the relevant thing is just that Toto is moving around.
Agreed. I've changed it to implicit {su'o}.
> 4.2 Toto only barks when he is "there", right? Otherwise you could
> put a {nu'u} between {ta} and the second {fau}.
Yes, the {nu'u} is missing. I should probably use the simpler
gek-termset, which I actually like as opposed to {nu'i}, and then it
would be:
(4.1b) bajra fau lo nu zvati ge ca da ti gi ca de ta fau lo nu cmoni
(it auto-terminates after the second term unlike the nu'i-termset)
5. {dy cėnmo lo ka sčpcni mųtce};
This is actually a more general question, since this construction
recurs. To me, a sentence like the above one wouldn't be any different
from {dy sepcni mutce}. I am guessing you have a more refined
interpretation of {cinmo}. Can you quickly explain it, or give some pointer?
I wouldn't read too much into it. Adding {cinmo} just has a different
flavor to it, like an additional emphasis on the act/state of feeling
something. Clearly, that it is superfluous doesn't mean it's bad to put
it there. It's only really superfluous here because {sepcni} is already
an emotion. {cinmo} lets us feel anything we put in cinmo2, like {cinmo
lo ka kakne}, which is useful in my opinion.
mi'e la selpa'i mu'o
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.