And now for something completely different

[djandus]

Quick translation questions! (Not baby related!)

I'm trying to translate "Are you crazy?!" Ignoring attitudinals, is this the most efficient way?

 .i xu da pe do fenki

mu'o mi'e djos

[vitci'i]

Why not just say {.i xu do fenki}?

Also, I suspect that tolracli may be closer to the intended meaning than
fenki.

[tijlan]

Should it even be a real question? The phrase in many cases suggests
that the speaker thinks the addressee IS crazy in a certain way, not
actually expecting an answer from them.

mu'o

[djandus]

The issue I had with that is the x₁ place is an "action/event" not a person -- so I figured I need to say the actions/events associated with you are what's crazy.

http://vlasisku.lojban.org/vlasisku/fenki

I also thought about going with {tolracli}, but when I compared the ways {racli} and {fenki} are defined, they seemed to be antonyms (though I could be wrong)

(That is, they both have the same place structure, have relatively polar meanings, and one is in the notes of the other.)

[djandus]

Oooh, that's a good point... I forgot how rhetorical it is...

 .i paunai xu da pe do fenki

???

[Pierre Abbat]

On Sunday 06 November 2011 12:48:06 djandus wrote:
> The issue I had with that is the x₁ place is an "action/event" not a person
> -- so I figured I need to say the actions/events associated with you are
> what's crazy.
> http://vlasisku.lojban.org/vlasisku/fenki

The way to handle that is "tu'a do fenki".

Pierre
--
La sal en el mar es más que en la sangre.
Le sel dans la mer est plus que dans le sang.

[djandus]

That was what I had tried before {da pe do fenki}, but I thought that it might be clearer the other way... Tell me if I'm thinking through any of the following wrong.

I've been thinking of {tu'a do} as "There's a specific abstraction involving you that I have in mind, but it's really not worth  the effort to express it." So, I would translate {tu'a do fenki} as "some-abstraction-involving you is-crazy"

On the other hand . . .

I've been thinking of {da pe do} as "There is something that is associated with you, and it's not necessarily like ownership." So then, if the x₁ place of {fenki} is for actions/events, then it {da pe do} automatically does what {tu'a do} does (says there's an abstraction involving you) as well as saying the relationship is a loose association not necessarily like ownership. (as oppose to the space of any possible abstraction, which usually are nothing like possession) So I figured you can get more quickly to the sorts of things I need to say, like "Your thoughts/actions are crazy." which feels more like a loose possessive...

[.arpis.]

You might find use for {zo'ei}: http://vlasisku.lojban.org/zo%27ei

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/4HUTYUK6DW0J.

To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.

[djandus]

Whoa, wait. {zo'e pe} just blew my mind. For some reason, I thought I couldn't do that!

Is that for exactly what I think it is? As in, exactly what I was looking for?

.ui

mu'o mi'e .djandus.