Subject: Re: [lojban] translation of "Mark"

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2001 22:24:54 EDT

In a message dated 4/4/2001 5:34:43 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> <i le cukta po la .izeias. po'u cespre>

{le cukta befi la izeias poi cespre} (but {cespre} is not too good for a 
prophet, who proclaims God's word but is often not particularly holy in other 
respects. {cevysku}?

<mi cu rinka > 
{mi ba gasnu} needs {lenu}

<mi notcrida> 
{LEmi notcrida} but the messenger is not an angel (who might resent being 
classed with fairies) but in fact another prophet, Jack Dunker.

<I didn't know what to do with the honorific "Christ", > 
Leaving it was good. The lojban forms seem to involve {grasu}, which seems 
foredoomed to make an unholy title.

Robin-CA
<I think you're taking the passage too literally; klaji is a physical
road, 'your way' in the original was not intended to mean a physical
road, I think. >

In the Isaiah context, it really does seem to mean a physical road (back to 
Israel from Babylon) and even if it is a metaphor, the physical road is the 
appropriate form.

The rest of his remarks seem about right, though I got lost in the run-on 
selbri there too deep to sort out.

Nice start though ( I like {dei cfari})