From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Mar 03 05:48:35 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 3 Mar 2003 13:48:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 21206 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2003 13:48:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2003 13:48:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Mar 2003 13:48:33 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 18pqIz-0000xu-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:48:33 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18pqIt-0000xb-00; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:48:27 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:48:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from postfix4-1.free.fr ([213.228.0.62]) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18pqIl-0000xR-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2003 05:48:19 -0800 Received: from imp1-2.free.fr (imp1-2.free.fr [213.228.0.151]) by postfix4-1.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2082C16811; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:48:18 +0100 (CET) Received: by imp1-2.free.fr (Postfix, from userid 33) id E8DEE8739F; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:48:17 +0100 (CET) To: "Newton, Philip" Subject: [lojban] Re: ma cmene le cmana Message-ID: <1046699297.3e635d21dad73@imp.free.fr> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 14:48:17 +0100 (CET) Cc: "'jexOm.'" , lojban-list@lojban.org References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.6 X-archive-position: 4291 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jexom@free.fr Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: "jexOm." From: "jexOm." Reply-To: jexom@free.fr X-Originating-IP: 130.213.140.7 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out Thanks again for your help. > coi .jexOm. do cusku di'e > > So do you think the following (for example) would be more correct? > > > > {mi nelci lezu'o mi cusku lo'u ma cmene le cmana le'u > > .i ta'o la lojban. te cmene zo labma'a le cmana poi se cmene > > zoi my. Mont-Blanc .my. la fasyban.} > > I think you need {te se cmene} rather than {te cmene} since you appear > to be > using the order x3 x1 x2 and not x3 x2 x1 (which is what {te} gives > you). OK. > And I'm not sure whether your use of a language name as x3 > ("namer/name-user > [person]") of {cmene} is appropriate. Other than that, it does, indeed, > look > better to me. Yes, I don't know why, I was thinking of a construction like with {tavla4}. I didn't check before... Using {bau} is necessary, then. > (As for style, I'd be more inclined to say {mi nelci lezu'o cusku > ...}, > leaving out the second {mi}, but that's a matter of style, not of > grammar. > My choice is probably influenced by the grammar of the languages I > know > best, which use an [impersonal] infinitive in such constructions.) So, next try: {mi nelci lezu'o cusku lo'u ma cmene le cmana le'u .i ta'o zo labma'a to bau la lojban. toi cmene le cmana poi se cmene zoi my. Mont-Blanc .my. bau la fasyban.} I didn't really know where to put {bau la lojban.}, so I said it inside parenthesis. Something like: {.i ta'o zo labma'a cmene le cmana poi se cmene zoi my. Mont-Blanc .my. bau la fasyban. ku'o bau la lojban.} would work I think, but {bau la lojban.} is very far from {labma'a} then.