From rlpowell@csclub.uwaterloo.ca Sun Mar 18 11:27:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 18 Mar 2001 19:27:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 2977 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2001 19:27:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Mar 2001 19:27:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca) (129.97.134.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Mar 2001 20:28:47 -0000 Received: (from rlpowell@localhost) by calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id OAA04599 for lojban@onelist.com; Sun, 18 Mar 2001 14:34:30 -0500 (EST) Resent-Message-Id: <200103181934.OAA04599@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 14:33:19 -0500 To: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: New Translation Message-ID: <20010318143319.A3953@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from jjllambias@hotmail.com on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:09:01PM +0000 Resent-From: rlpowell@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 14:34:30 -0500 Resent-To: lojban@onelist.com X-eGroups-From: Robin Lee Powell From: Robin Lee Powell On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:09:01PM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote: > > la camgusmis cusku di'e > > > > la sol purjbeja'e bavmro > > > >Didn't think of la sol, actually. Although I think I prefer: > > > >la sol purjberi'a bavmro > > I suppose it depends on how you think the lujvo is interpreted. > > I would interpret {purjbeja'e} as {jalge be le nu purjbe} and > {purjberi'a} as {rinka be le nu purjbe}. > > You seem to interpret them as {nu purjbe kei je jalge} and > {nu purjbe kei je rinka}. > > I usually try the {be} interpretation before the {je} one. > In this case they give somewhat opposite meanings. Actually, I'm interpreting them as jalge be fa le nu purjbe and rinka be fa le nu purjbe but it's possible that I'm on crack there. In fact, I probably am, since the x1 of purjbeja'e should be something that can fit in the x1 place of jalge. Whoops. Thanks. > > > mi kufra le po'o ctino > > > >Changed that since then, actually: > > > >semu'i mi ctino kufra > > semu'ibo mi ctino se kufra rlpowell@calum> jbofihe -x semu'ibo mi ctino se kufra -------------------- SYNTAX ERROR IN TEXT -------------------- Misparsed token : bo [BO] (line 1, col 7) Latest successfully parsed tokens : mu'i [BAI] (line 1, col 3) se [SE] (line 1, col 1) MARKER : PRIVATE_START_BAI -------------------- Is jbofi'e smoking crack again? You're certainly right that semu'i binds to mi in that sentence (I was using my poetic license :), but is that the way to fix it? > But that's two syllables too many, so maybe just: > > semu'ibo ctino kufra > > > > i mu'inai do darno mi > > > >Umm, I don't know. 8) The .i is fixable: > > > >.oi mu'inai do darno mi > > Actually, I forgot {bo} is necessary after {mu'inai}, so it > should be: > > mu'inaibo do darno mi See above. -Robin -- http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. Information wants to be free. Too bad most of it is crap. --RLP