Subject: Re: [lojban] Allah

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 02:09:25 -0400

At 10:10 PM 06/02/2001 -0400, Rob Speer wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 10:09:14PM -0400, [email-masked] wrote:
> > <I guess it depends on the goal of translation--is it to express the same
> > idea, or to additionally imitate the phrasing of the original?? With a
> > language like lojban, which is "different by design," how practical is 
> it to
> > try the latter?>
> > Depends on what you are translating. Some things require moe style than
> > others. But I think the Alice translators, for example, have given up 
> on a
> > lot of Alice -- the horrible puns first, I suspect.
>
>I must say that I'm fairly impressed by {mi'a te cmene ra lu ractu canmi'a
>li'u ki'u le nu ra ctuca mi'a} as a way to salvage "We called him Tortoise
>because he taught us!"
>
>Well, kind of. "Rabbit Sand-Laugher" doesn't even sound like a plausible name.
>The inserted consonant could be changed to s where you would get
>{ractu casmi'a} -> "Rabbit Ridiculing-Laugher".
>
>Or does this cause confusion because "Ridiculing-Laugher" would be said in
>English as "Mock" while another sense of that same word was just previously
>translated to Lojban as {jitfa}? Oi, I see a horrible inter-language pun 
>coming
>on...

I was thinking about alternative approaches, and the best I could come up 
with would be to mangle la resprtestudo (a word once used for "tortoise") 
as resprctucado. fu'ivla can force puns fairly easily. But on further 
thought, I like the one that was chosen better.

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org