Subject: Re: tanru [was: RE: [lojban] Three more issues

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 17:04:28 EDT

In a message dated 4/19/2001 5:59:26 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> fu'e.o'onairu'e pe'ipei srera xaksu fa mi le nuntroci temci
> lepu'u finti le bi'unai broda cei skutcaci co lobykai .i xu
> zasti fa le drata be la'edi'u .i pa'e lo broda ba binxo fi ma
> .onai le nuntroci pesekai leka mibypre fu'o .i to'u ko mintu
> zukte gi'ebabo te cmene fa la xlali fe le jalge be le nuntroci
> nanca poi zirpu ja lojbo
> 
A case in point:
"Rant: How should I feel I mistakenly wasted time in attempting...[syntax 
break here]
... the creation of whatchamacallits, i.e. characteristic Lojban modes of 
expression. Does any other exist aside from the referent of the last 
sentence? Under what conditions, honestly, will these whatchamacallits 
change unless attempts possessing me-person-ness? End Rant.
Do likewise and then the bad will call the results of the purple and 
lojbanic years of attempts names."
Answers: Shitty. Yes (I have a couple hundred pages under analysis, of which 
only about thirty are yours -- and they include considerable English, 
fortunately). Lots of other people use the language for lots of things, not 
just short stories, tirades, and cryptic suggestions. 

Last sentence changed to "the results of the purple and Lojbanic years will 
be called bad."
Note: I called your stuff hard to follow and frequently unclear (see above), 
not bad in any esthetic sense, and often not even in a grammatical one.

I'd love to take your advice, but my expertise -- if any -- lies elsewhere, 
so I stick to tht last for now.