From phma@oltronics.net Mon Jun 25 16:38:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 25 Jun 2001 23:38:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 99131 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2001 23:38:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Jun 2001 23:38:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neofelis.ixazon.lan) (207.15.133.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 25 Jun 2001 23:38:27 -0000 Received: by neofelis.ixazon.lan (Postfix, from userid 500) id BA9223C55B; Mon, 25 Jun 2001 19:37:59 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: phma@oltronics.net To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Proper 21CI Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 18:35:43 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.29.2] Content-Type: text/plain References: <97.17487c5f.2868e6cc@aol.com> In-Reply-To: <97.17487c5f.2868e6cc@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01062519375905.17030@neofelis> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: phma@ixazon.dynip.com From: Pierre Abbat On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, pycyn@aol.com wrote: > >So, in preaching class they say to really get into the structure of your >texts. And how better that than translating into Lojban. Except that it is >frustrating when pieces that seem to work on their own don't work in what >purposrts to be simple parallel constructions and so on. I'm not sure I'm >deeper into my text, but I sure need help with the Lojban. e.g. Amos 6:1-7: >unaisadai oiro'osaidai doi do poi surla vi la zion gi'e {unaisadai} looks like a typo - {sa} is used in speech when you have said erroneous words, and erases to the previous occurrence of the next word, which is {dai}, of which there isn't any. I think oiro'i, oiro'a, and oiro'o all apply, so it should just be {oisaidai}. By the way, the Hebrew word is "hoy", which is where {oi} came from. s/zion/tsion/ I'd drop {do poi} - the {do'u} makes it clear the whole phrase is a vocative. >cinmo leka snura kei vi le cmana be la samarias do'u no'u s/samarias/comron/ Not sure which is better: {la comRON noi cmana} or {le cmana be la comRON}. >le misno be le pamoi be loi natmi be'o be'o ku noi se klama >le zdani be la .isra,el >.i ko ravyklama la kalnex gi'e zgana gi'e bazibo klama la {ravyklama} (or {ravykla} is correct for `ivru. >xamat poi banli gi'e bazibo nanklama la gat pe lai filistin {xamat noi banli} - there's only one xamat, isn't there? Or does it mean "Greater Hamath", Hamath and its suburbs? >(xu do xauzma lepuzi se liste natm i .ija xu le tutra be do I'd say {le di'u natmi} - {puzi} is a tense marker. s/ija/i/ - "or" is a rhetorical device here, not a logical conjunction. >cu brazma le tutra be ri) >.i xu le puzi se liste cu xauzma le re vi natmi .ija xu le >tutra be ra cu brazma le tutra be do >doi do poi dargau le palci djedi gi'e jbigau le vlile nu >pajni >.i uinaisaidai oiro'osaidai doi do poi vreta lo xantydenmai >se jadni ckana vau gi'e preja lodo sfofa vau gi'e citka lo {xantydenmai se jadni ckana} translates the English, but the Hebrew just says "mitot shen" or "beds of tooth". I don't think {preja} is right. >cmalanme befi da ku e lo cmabakni pe ra'i lo cidja selsru I'd say {zanselcu'a ciflanme} - but that's translating the English. What does "karim" mean? >vau gi'e se kansa be lo jgita ku sanga lo bebna gi'ebo finti I think "navel" here is a different word than the one that means "fool". >sepa'a la david lo cnino zgike gi'e pinxe lo vanju lo >ri'irbaktu gi'ebo pejgau lo xagrai grasu vo'a gi'e ku'i na >badri lenu la iosep se daspo >.iseki'ubo loi ca se skicu bazi pamoi loi vlile se bevri >befo lovo'a zdani .ije le te salci befi le preja bazi se >sisti When you think it's good, go ahead and put it in CVS. phma