Subject: Three loaves and a bagel

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 18:14:31 EDT

Translated by Eugene Sklyanin, reevised under the guidance of the usual 
experts.
[1] le nanmu cu xagji
[2] .i te vecnu pa barda bliku be lo nanba gi'e citka
[3] .i ku'i za'o xagji
[4] .i te vecnu le remoi bliku gi'e citka
[5] .i ku'i za'o xagji
[6] .i te vecnu le cimoi bliku gi'e citka
[7] .i ku'i za'o xagji
[8] .i baku te vecnu loi cmalu djine nanba
.ije ba le nu citka pa le djine kei co'u xagji
[9] .i baku le nanmu cu darxi le stedu le xance gi'e cusku lu
[10] .oi mi bebna
[11] .i .uinai mi pu fesygau le ba'e so'i nanba ki'u ma
[12] .i .ei mi pu gasnu le nu le pa cmalu djine
cu pamoi le'i se citka be mi li'u

[1] <le> because we know which one we have in mind. The shift
between the introductory "a" and the subsequent "the" in English is
one of the hardest things for speakers of non-article languages to
pick up. Lb can do this shift (<pa nanmu> to <le nanmu>) but
generally is better off using <le>. Since the gender or the species is
not really important here, someone suggested just <prenu>, but
<nanmu> give the proper anecdotal concreteness.
[2] <pa> works here, because the numeration will play a role --
and, of course, we don't have a particular loaf in mind, other than it
being the first he bought and ate.
[3] <za'o> because eating a big anything seems a natural end to
hunger (arguable, but it seems to fit this story; "still" is as
superfective as "keeps on"). I think the whole "but still" could be
done with a tense connective, <ijaiza'obo>(?).
[4] Much of the discussion was on how to say "ate another loaf of
bread," to differentiate that from "ate the (same) loaf again ." The
ordinals seem to do the job here.
[8] <loi> suggests to me sweeping up a bunch of bagels (is this
concept worth a lujvo from the get-go?) and makes the transition to
"just one" harder. I like <le pamoi djine>, but <le> brings it
implicitly to the bunch he just bought. The tense situation could be
sharpened to <ca'o le nu citka kei cu'o xagri> or -- depending on
the case -- <ba'o le nu....>
[10] After all the missing subjects and objects, the <mi> is strange:
simple <bebna> would do as an observative. Among my head
striking acquaintances this would be normal (though the expression
would probably be /goice kof/, presumably to the same effect). 
[12] This seems very complex for "I ought to have eaten the bagel first," 
<ei mi pamoi citka le djine> still doesn't quite do it.