From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Thu Feb 15 14:46:04 2001
Return-Path: <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>
X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 15 Feb 2001 22:45:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 70627 invoked from network); 15 Feb 2001 22:45:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Feb 2001 22:45:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ej.egroups.com) (10.1.10.49) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Feb 2001 22:45:55 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de
Received: from [10.1.10.126] by ej.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Feb 2001 22:45:55 -0000
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:45:51 -0000
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: LotR opener & ramblings
Message-ID: <96hm6v+o47m@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <sa8ac174.039@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1232
X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster
X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79
From: "A.W.T." <Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de>

--- In lojban@y..., And Rosta <arosta@u...> wrote:
> Elrond:
> #On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Jay Kominek wrote:
> #> One ring to rule them all,
> #> One ring to find them,
> #> One ring to bring them all,
> #> and in the darkness bind them.
> #> le pa djine se finti fi zu'o turni piro zo'e
> #> .i le pa djine se finti fi zu'o facki piro zo'e
> #> .i le pa djine se finti fi zu'o vizbei piro zo'e
> #> .ije nenri fe le manku fa le pu'u rinju kei
> #
> # pa djine tefi'e zu'o turni ko'a goi roda
> #.i pa djine tefi'e zu'o facki ra
> #.i pa djine tefi'e zu'o vizbei ko'a
> #.ije ne'i le manku tefi'e ralte ra
> 
> Assuming the translation is from English, and ignoring
> rhythm:
> 
> pa djine be tefi'e loi nu turni ro ko'a 
> .i pa djine be tefi'e loi nu facki ko'a
> .i pa djine be tefi'e loi nu vizbei ro ko'a
> gi'e va'o le nu manku kei ralte ko'a

Can't imagine that {be} is grammatical here like it's in e.g. {pa djine be lo solji/lo rijno/lo fagri etc.}
{ro ko'a} doesn't seem bad
{facki ko'a} will not work out the sense like {facki zi'o ko'a} might do; better: {tolcri ko'a}
{gi'e *va'o* le nu manku} seems to be less natlang idiomatic than {ne'i/nenri le manku} or even {mankyne'i ralte ko'a}

co'o mi'e .aulun.