From phma@webjockey.net Mon Jan 28 16:38:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 29 Jan 2002 00:38:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 8278 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2002 00:38:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2002 00:38:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (208.150.110.21) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Jan 2002 00:38:15 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id 21D1D3C479; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:38:11 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: "lojban" Subject: Re: [lojban] Bible translation style question Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:38:09 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] References: In-Reply-To: X-Spamtrap: fesmri@ixazon.dynip.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <02012819380934.30016@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat Reply-To: phma@webjockey.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92712300 On Monday 28 January 2002 18:55, Craig wrote: li'o > >Or, similarly, while Lojban grammar makes VSO order inherently marked, > >SVO and SOV orders are equally unmarked, yet there is a widespread > >preference in current usage for SVO, > > I use SOV whenever it would be as clear as the SVO (there are times when it > wouldn't, but they are not all that frequent) > > > even though SOV is (IIRC) the > >most common order, cross-linguistically. Again this is because we are > >all accustomed to SVO order. > > Interestingly, I have been reading about 'implicational universals' among > languages, and Lojban is similar to both SVO and SOV languages in other > aspects, but slightly closer to SVO. Should sentences of the form {la b cusku lu" dzadza dzadzadza "li'u la c} be worded as {la b lu" dzadza dzadzadza "li'u la c cusku} or {la b lu" dzadza dzadzadza "li'u cusku la c}? phma