120 views
Skip to first unread message

MorphemeAddict

unread,
May 18, 2012, 3:22:57 AM5/18/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Example 16.4 of Chapter 18 of the online CLL has "30,000,000" instead of "300,000,000" for (cinoki'oki'o) and previous examples also have "300,000,000". 
http://dag.github.com/cll/18/16/

I don't know how to save the change. 

stevo

Jonathan Jones

unread,
May 18, 2012, 3:36:47 AM5/18/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
cinoki'oki'o is 30,000,000.

The previous example I found (http://dag.github.com/cll/18/14/) has cinonoki'oki'o and is correct as well.

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

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

Robin Lee Powell

unread,
May 18, 2012, 1:20:36 PM5/18/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
If there was an error (which as stated there is not), it would go at
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/CLL,+aka+Reference+Grammar,+Errata

-Robin

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 01:36:47AM -0600, Jonathan Jones wrote:
> cinoki'oki'o *is* 30,000,000.
>
> The previous example I found (http://dag.github.com/cll/18/14/) has
> cino*no*ki'oki'o
http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

MorphemeAddict

unread,
May 18, 2012, 3:40:40 PM5/18/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Okay, you're right about that part. I didn't see that. What I saw was that both have "bi" (8) as the exponent, and in 16.4 the exponent is only 7. 
14.2)  li cinonoki'oki'o du
            li bi gei ci
       The-number three-zero-zero-comma-comma equals
            the-number eight scientific three.
       300,000,000 = 3 × 108
16.4)  li cinoki'oki'o du
            li fu'a biboi ciboi panoboi ge'a gei
       The-number 30-comma-comma equals
            the-number (RP!) 8, (3, 10, null-op), exponential-notation.
       30,000,000 = 3 × 108
stevo

selpa'i

unread,
May 22, 2012, 6:12:08 PM5/22/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi ro do

ni'o uo mi mo'u fanva la snime blabi .i judri fa zoi zoi.
www.lojban.org/tiki/la+snime+blabi .zoi .i .a'o cinri gi'e pluka vau da
.i mi pu'o ku ge srera sisku gi dragau da'i .i ku'i .e'a ro da xa'o
tcidu .i .e'a ko mi jungau lo da'i se srera
ni'o ma ro do se jinvi

ki'e mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--
.i da xamgu ganse fi no na'ebo lo risna
.i lo vajrai cu nonselji'u lo kanla

vruxir

unread,
Jun 1, 2012, 10:11:12 PM6/1/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
.ui zdile .i mi ca ca'o tcidu .i mi ba'o tidyfri ji'e lo nu le noltruni'u cu citka le fepri .e le livga

ni'o pau lo'u mircatrydakfu le'u me ma .i pau do djica bo cusku lu mirli catra dakfu li'u .a lo drata vau xu

ni'o pu reroi viska lo'u rifcoi le'u .i la'a do djica bo cusku zo ricfoi


ni'o ba zi di'a tcidu

mu'o mi'e .vruxir.

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 2, 2012, 7:12:54 AM6/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
ki'e la. vruxir
.i ĭe mi skùdji «lu mìrli càtra dàkfu li'u» .i .u'e bèbna nu srèra
.i mi dràgau zo rìcfoi .i ckìre fi lo nu jùngau mi fi ku

mu'o mi'e la selpà'i
--
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/-/L7blk9qR1cUJ.

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.

Pierre Abbat

unread,
Jun 2, 2012, 10:21:35 PM6/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Saturday 02 June 2012 07:12:54 selpa'i wrote:
> ki'e la. vruxir
> .i i(e mi skůdji «lu měrli cŕtra dŕkfu li'u» .i .u'e bčbna nu srčra
> .i mi drŕgau zo rěcfoi .i ckěre fi lo nu jůngau mi fi ku
>
> mu'o mi'e la selpŕ'i

ma rinka le krokoziabra .i ri cfipu mi lo du'u zoi ky. měrli .ky. me zo
mirli .enai zo merli

mu'omi'e .pier.
--
When a barnacle settles down, its brain disintegrates.
Já não percebe nada, já não percebe nada.

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 3, 2012, 7:41:06 AM6/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
.oi .i za'a lo do nunmritci zo'u lo se basna ke karsna lerfu cu spofu .i
ma se viska do fi'o se catlu zoi gy. à è ì ò ù ĭ ŭ .gy .i karsna lerfu
la. iunikod. lo se basna .i .a'o lo drata cu viska kakne

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Am 03.06.2012 04:21, schrieb Pierre Abbat:
> On Saturday 02 June 2012 07:12:54 selpa'i wrote:
>> ki'e la. vruxir
>> .i i(e mi skůdji «lu měrli cŕtra dŕkfu li'u» .i .u'e bčbna nu srčra
>> .i mi drŕgau zo rěcfoi .i ckěre fi lo nu jůngau mi fi ku
>>
>> mu'o mi'e la selpŕ'i
> ma rinka le krokoziabra .i ri cfipu mi lo du'u zoi ky. měrli .ky. me zo
> mirli .enai zo merli
>
> mu'omi'e .pier.

--

Pierre Abbat

unread,
Jun 3, 2012, 7:57:17 AM6/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Sunday 03 June 2012 07:41:06 selpa'i wrote:
> .oi .i za'a lo do nunmritci zo'u lo se basna ke karsna lerfu cu spofu .i
> ma se viska do fi'o se catlu zoi gy. à è ì ò ù ĭ ŭ .gy .i karsna lerfu
> la. iunikod. lo se basna .i .a'o lo drata cu viska kakne

mi viska me'o tei abu grav.bu foi tei ebu grav.bu foi tei ibu grav.bu foi tei
obu grav.bu foi tei ubu grav.bu foi tei ibu tordu bu foi tei ubu tordu bu foi

mu'o mi'e .pier.
--
sei do'anai mi'a djuno puze'e noroi nalselganse srera

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 3, 2012, 9:51:36 AM6/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
ue je'e .i ja'o ja'a drani .i ku'i ma krinu lo nu do viska zoi
ly.
.i i(e mi skůdji «lu měrli cŕtra dŕkfu li'u» .i .u'e bčbna nu srčra
.i mi drŕgau zo rěcfoi .i ckěre fi lo nu jůngau mi fi ku
.ly
.i .u'e ru'e cizra

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Am 03.06.2012 13:57, schrieb Pierre Abbat:
> On Sunday 03 June 2012 07:41:06 selpa'i wrote:
>> .oi .i za'a lo do nunmritci zo'u lo se basna ke karsna lerfu cu spofu .i
>> ma se viska do fi'o se catlu zoi gy. à è ì ò ù ĭ ŭ .gy .i karsna lerfu
>> la. iunikod. lo se basna .i .a'o lo drata cu viska kakne
> mi viska me'o tei abu grav.bu foi tei ebu grav.bu foi tei ibu grav.bu foi tei
> obu grav.bu foi tei ubu grav.bu foi tei ibu tordu bu foi tei ubu tordu bu foi
>
> mu'o mi'e .pier.

--

vruxir

unread,
Jun 3, 2012, 4:59:45 PM6/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
mi ji'a pu viska zoi

  ly.
  .i i(e mi skůdji «lu měrli cŕtra dŕkfu li'u» .i .u'e bčbna nu srčra
  .i mi drŕgau zo rěcfoi .i ckěre fi lo nu jůngau mi fi ku
  .ly

.i na'e djuno lo du'u jalge ma kau .i mi plino la .gugl.grups. lo nu tcidu


mu'o mi'e .vruxir.


Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jun 14, 2012, 12:13:02 PM6/14/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
coi ro do

ni'o uo mi mo'u fanva la snime blabi .i judri fa zoi zoi. www.lojban.org/tiki/la+snime+blabi .zoi .i .a'o cinri gi'e pluka vau da .i mi pu'o ku ge srera sisku gi dragau da'i .i ku'i .e'a ro da xa'o tcidu .i .e'a ko mi jungau lo da'i se srera
ni'o ma ro do se jinvi

ki'e mu'o mi'e la selpa'i


.i mi baza tcidu la'e  da'u .i pamai mi djica lo nu judgau do lo du'u lo lerfu pe lu la snime blabi li'u kakne lo nu se ganzu zo'e lu ba melbi silna li'u .i remai ji'a ci lo panzi be mi cu se cuntu lo xalbo draci be tu'a syby be'o no'u la'o gy. Uncle Motti and the Seven Dwarfs gy. to la'o net. http://jewishtheatreworkshop.org/ net.

      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 14, 2012, 12:53:48 PM6/14/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi la gejyspa

de'i li 14.06.2012 ti'u li 18:13 cu cusku fa la'o gy. Michael Turniansky gy. fe di'e:

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
coi ro do

ni'o uo mi mo'u fanva la snime blabi .i judri fa zoi zoi. www.lojban.org/tiki/la+snime+blabi .zoi .i .a'o cinri gi'e pluka vau da .i mi pu'o ku ge srera sisku gi dragau da'i .i ku'i .e'a ro da xa'o tcidu .i .e'a ko mi jungau lo da'i se srera
ni'o ma ro do se jinvi

ki'e mu'o mi'e la selpa'i


.i mi baza tcidu la'e  da'u

ui .a'o


.i pamai mi djica lo nu judgau do lo du'u lo lerfu pe lu la snime blabi li'u kakne lo nu se ganzu zo'e lu ba melbi silna li'u

.i ua .u'i cinri .i mi na ba'u ta'e jundi lo nu da'i da ka'e se ganzu fi lo drata valsi .i se ju mi na rau roi go'i .i .ei mi zenba .i ju'o lo lojbo cu mapti fi lo nu facki joi finti fi lo nundraci valsi .i .a'u pau nai ma drata ke nundraci valsi .i (to li'a lo gismu pa mei na jai cinri .i sarcu fa tu'a lo clamau toi)


.i remai ji'a ci lo panzi be mi cu se cuntu lo xalbo draci be tu'a syby be'o no'u la'o gy. Uncle Motti and the Seven Dwarfs gy. to la'o net. http://jewishtheatreworkshop.org/ net.

ui dai .i simlu lo ka xajmi gi'e zdile .i zo'o mi pacna lo nu la snime blabi pe lo draci lo mi snime blabi cu zmadu lo ka mencre kei gi'e mleca lo ka bebna .i do ba ganse lo nu mi tavla fi ma kau .u'i

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jun 25, 2012, 9:50:45 AM6/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
   i mi puzi co'a rcidu le lisri be fi do .i cinri gi'e jai frili .i pa cmalu te fapro .i le minra cu pilno zo ga'i  zo'u  va'o lo nu le minra cu sinma le noltruni'u kei lo minra cu bilga lo nu pilno lu ga'inai li'u

       --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 25, 2012, 10:13:01 AM6/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com

Am 25.06.2012 15:50, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
> i mi puzi co'a rcidu le lisri be fi do .i cinri gi'e jai frili .i
> pa cmalu te fapro .i le minra cu pilno zo ga'i zo'u va'o lo nu le
> minra cu sinma le noltruni'u kei lo minra cu bilga lo nu pilno lu
> ga'inai li'u

ui je'e .i zo ga'i zo'u: mi no roi birti lo du'u zo ga'i fa'u �lu ga'i
nai li'u� mo fa'u mo .i la jbovlaste cu xusra pa da .i je la cukta cu
xusra lo drata .i ku'i ie �lu ga'i nai li'u� drani .i ba dragau

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--
.i pau mi me ma .i pa mai ko mi jungau la'e di'u
.i ba bo mi va'o lo nu nelci lo nu me ma kau cu barkla
.i va'o lo nu na nelci cu denpa ti lo nu mi drata



Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jun 25, 2012, 12:53:06 PM6/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:13 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 25.06.2012 15:50, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

  i mi puzi co'a rcidu le lisri be fi do .i cinri gi'e jai frili .i pa cmalu te fapro .i le minra cu pilno zo ga'i  zo'u  va'o lo nu le minra cu sinma le noltruni'u kei lo minra cu bilga lo nu pilno lu ga'inai li'u

ui je'e .i zo ga'i zo'u: mi no roi birti lo du'u zo ga'i fa'u «lu ga'i nai li'u» mo fa'u mo .i la jbovlaste cu xusra pa da .i je la cukta cu xusra lo drata .i ku'i ie «lu ga'i nai li'u» drani .i ba dragau


 mi na zgana  lo du'u bu'u dakau le cukta   la jbovlaste na sarxe tu'a lo nu pilno .i pe'u ko jarco fi mi 
 
                --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jun 25, 2012, 4:25:14 PM6/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
lo bi'u nabmi zo'u bu'u pa stuzi do citka lo'u za'u ru'e le'u .e nai lo'u za'u re'u le'u .iji'a lo jufra po'u lu mu'i lo nu ny tai melbi kei lo kalte ny kecti gi'e cusku lu ko bajra doi malselfu'a verba li'u li'u cu cfipu mi re da .i pa mai me'o ny sinxa ma  .i re mai ni'i lo nu me'o ny cu lidne lu kecti gi'e cusku li'u kei me'o ny sumti fi li re fe la'e zo kecti jo'u ba'e la'e zo cusku .i zo ny bilga lo nu na sumti fi re le remei  
      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jun 25, 2012, 4:35:47 PM6/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
.i ie drani .i mi srera ki'e do'u .i mi xa'o dragau ja'e tu'a «lu mu'i lo nu by tai melbi kei lo kalte cu kecti by gi'e cusku «lu ko bajra doi malsefu'a verba li'u» .i .i'o do mi jungau

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jun 26, 2012, 7:39:12 AM6/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 4:35 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 25.06.2012 22:25, schrieb Michael Turniansky:


On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Michael Turniansky <mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
 

On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:13 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 25.06.2012 15:50, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

  i mi puzi co'a rcidu le lisri be fi do .i cinri gi'e jai frili .i pa cmalu te fapro .i le minra cu pilno zo ga'i  zo'u  va'o lo nu le minra cu sinma le noltruni'u kei lo minra cu bilga lo nu pilno lu ga'inai li'u

ui je'e .i zo ga'i zo'u: mi no roi birti lo du'u zo ga'i fa'u «lu ga'i nai li'u» mo fa'u mo .i la jbovlaste cu xusra pa da .i je la cukta cu xusra lo drata .i ku'i ie «lu ga'i nai li'u» drani .i ba dragau


 mi na zgana  lo du'u bu'u dakau le cukta   la jbovlaste na sarxe tu'a lo nu pilno .i pe'u ko jarco fi mi 
 
                --gejyspa

lo bi'u nabmi zo'u bu'u pa stuzi do citka lo'u za'u ru'e le'u .e nai lo'u za'u re'u le'u .iji'a lo jufra po'u lu mu'i lo nu ny tai melbi kei lo kalte ny kecti gi'e cusku lu ko bajra doi malselfu'a verba li'u li'u cu cfipu mi re da .i pa mai me'o ny sinxa ma  .i re mai ni'i lo nu me'o ny cu lidne lu kecti gi'e cusku li'u kei me'o ny sumti fi li re fe la'e zo kecti jo'u ba'e la'e zo cusku .i zo ny bilga lo nu na sumti fi re le remei    

.i ie drani .i mi srera ki'e do'u .i mi xa'o dragau ja'e tu'a «lu mu'i lo nu by tai melbi kei lo kalte cu kecti by gi'e cusku «lu ko bajra doi malsefu'a verba li'u» .i .i'o do mi jungau

    malsefu'a -> malselfu'a  :-)
        --gejyspa
 

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 2, 2012, 10:19:03 AM7/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"ni'o lo kalte ca lo nu lo xarju panzi cu jbikla cu daktuncatra gi'e lebna lo fepri .e lo livga gi'e bevri fi'o sinxa ku fi lo noltruni'u .i lo jukpa cu .ei silnyjau jukpa xai"

  Now, I'm not an expert on the grammar of experimental camvo like "xai", and obviously you intend the referent to be lo fepri jo'u lo livga, but couldn't it also be lo noltruni'u jo'u lo jukpa?  Is "xai" like "ra", vague? Or is it like "ri" and strictly referring to the most recent n>2 sumti?
      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 2, 2012, 10:36:43 AM7/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com

Am 02.07.2012 16:19, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

"ni'o lo kalte ca lo nu lo xarju panzi cu jbikla cu daktuncatra gi'e lebna lo fepri .e lo livga gi'e bevri fi'o sinxa ku fi lo noltruni'u .i lo jukpa cu .ei silnyjau jukpa xai"

  Now, I'm not an expert on the grammar of experimental camvo like "xai", and obviously you intend the referent to be lo fepri jo'u lo livga, but couldn't it also be lo noltruni'u jo'u lo jukpa?  Is "xai" like "ra", vague? Or is it like "ri" and strictly referring to the most recent n>2 sumti?

I use it like "ra" but referring to multiple sumti. I haven't seen this word used much, if at all, so I don't know how other people use it. I do think, however, that (if understood to work like ra) it is apparent that it refers to lung and liver, because the cook is unlikely to cook the queen and himself. :)
If xai is supposed to refer to the last <1 sumti immediately preceeding it, then another cmavo would be useful to have that behaves the way I used xai in the story (maybe xau). Let's hear what its inventor (Pierre, I believe) thinks about it.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 10:31:47 AM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 10:36 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 02.07.2012 16:19, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

"ni'o lo kalte ca lo nu lo xarju panzi cu jbikla cu daktuncatra gi'e lebna lo fepri .e lo livga gi'e bevri fi'o sinxa ku fi lo noltruni'u .i lo jukpa cu .ei silnyjau jukpa xai"

  Now, I'm not an expert on the grammar of experimental camvo like "xai", and obviously you intend the referent to be lo fepri jo'u lo livga, but couldn't it also be lo noltruni'u jo'u lo jukpa?  Is "xai" like "ra", vague? Or is it like "ri" and strictly referring to the most recent n>2 sumti?

I use it like "ra" but referring to multiple sumti. I haven't seen this word used much, if at all, so I don't know how other people use it. I do think, however, that (if understood to work like ra) it is apparent that it refers to lung and liver, because the cook is unlikely to cook the queen and himself. :)
If xai is supposed to refer to the last <1 sumti immediately preceeding it, then another cmavo would be useful to have that behaves the way I used xai in the story (maybe xau). Let's hear what its inventor (Pierre, I believe) thinks about it.


 lu .i mu'i bo na djica lo nu xaksu ro da fa ny po'o li'u zo'u mi za'ure'u se cfipu tu'a la'e zo ny

       --gejyspa


selpa'i

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 11:30:47 AM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 03.07.2012 16:31, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
 lu .i mu'i bo na djica lo nu xaksu ro da fa ny po'o li'u zo'u mi za'ure'u se cfipu tu'a la'e zo ny

ue .i ki'u ma mi ciska zo ny .i ba'o dragau ki'e do'u

mu'o

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 1:18:34 PM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:30 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.07.2012 16:31, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

 lu .i mu'i bo na djica lo nu xaksu ro da fa ny po'o li'u zo'u mi za'ure'u se cfipu tu'a la'e zo ny

ue .i ki'u ma mi ciska zo ny .i ba'o dragau ki'e do'u

mu'o

  lu .i ty cikygau lo ty. cmalu te gusni li'u zo'u xu ba'e lu cikygau pe'a li'u   se skudji .i du'o mi lo te gusni cu sipna najenai cikna  
 
             --gejyspa
 

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 1:28:45 PM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
.i lo te gusni ca lo nu ca'o te gusni cu cikna .i ca lo drata na cikna .i .au nai pilno zo pe'a .i pe'i na sarcu


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 3:02:50 PM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.07.2012 19:18, schrieb Michael Turniansky:



On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:30 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.07.2012 16:31, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

 lu .i mu'i bo na djica lo nu xaksu ro da fa ny po'o li'u zo'u mi za'ure'u se cfipu tu'a la'e zo ny

ue .i ki'u ma mi ciska zo ny .i ba'o dragau ki'e do'u

mu'o

  lu .i ty cikygau lo ty. cmalu te gusni li'u zo'u xu ba'e lu cikygau pe'a li'u   se skudji .i du'o mi lo te gusni cu sipna najenai cikna 

.i lo te gusni ca lo nu ca'o te gusni cu cikna .i ca lo drata na cikna .i .au nai pilno zo pe'a .i pe'i na sarcu


mi  bapli nagi'e stidi  vau lo nu do pilno pe'a .i sa'u mi pu kucli lo mukti be lo nu do pu na pilno lo cizme'a be fi mi valsi no'u zo gusygau .a zo tergu'igau

                 --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 3, 2012, 3:43:21 PM7/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
da na gasnu lo nu de te gusni .i sa'e lo te gusni poi na cikna cu to'e ki'u nai te gusni .i pe'i pei lo balji te gusni poi nenri lo do kumfa cu co'u ja de'a ckaji lo ka te gusni kei ca lo nu na cikna .i xu binxo lo te gusni ca ro nu do cikygau .i la'a cumki fa lo nu xusra la'e di'u .i je mi na jinvi lo du'u xlali .i ku'i na tadji lo nu da'i mi ciksi lo si'o ma kau te gusni .i do ma jinvi

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 6, 2012, 1:15:43 PM7/6/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 03.07.2012 21:02, schrieb Michael Turniansky:


On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 1:28 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.07.2012 19:18, schrieb Michael Turniansky:



On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:30 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.07.2012 16:31, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

 lu .i mu'i bo na djica lo nu xaksu ro da fa ny po'o li'u zo'u mi za'ure'u se cfipu tu'a la'e zo ny

ue .i ki'u ma mi ciska zo ny .i ba'o dragau ki'e do'u

mu'o

  lu .i ty cikygau lo ty. cmalu te gusni li'u zo'u xu ba'e lu cikygau pe'a li'u   se skudji .i du'o mi lo te gusni cu sipna najenai cikna 

.i lo te gusni ca lo nu ca'o te gusni cu cikna .i ca lo drata na cikna .i .au nai pilno zo pe'a .i pe'i na sarcu


mi  bapli nagi'e stidi  vau lo nu do pilno pe'a .i sa'u mi pu kucli lo mukti be lo nu do pu na pilno lo cizme'a be fi mi valsi no'u zo gusygau .a zo tergu'igau

da na gasnu lo nu de te gusni .i sa'e lo te gusni poi na cikna cu to'e ki'u nai te gusni .i pe'i pei lo balji te gusni poi nenri lo do kumfa cu co'u ja de'a ckaji lo ka te gusni kei ca lo nu na cikna .i xu binxo lo te gusni ca ro nu do cikygau .i la'a cumki fa lo nu xusra la'e di'u .i je mi na jinvi lo du'u xlali .i ku'i na tadji lo nu da'i mi ciksi lo si'o ma kau te gusni .i do ma jinvi

lu ko'a rodgau ko'e li'u na'o se smuni lo nu ko'a gasnu lo nu ko'e noi ga pu'i broda gi nu'o broda cu ca'a broda .i mi'o ka'e simxu lo nu toltu'i fi lo du'u lo manku balji  
cu te gusni .i ku'i la'e di'u na srana .i da'i mi falgau do .i la'a do puzu farlu .i la'anai na go'i .i na srana .i do na farlu pu'o lo nu mi falgau do .i   lo nu gusygau lo balji cu panra la'e di'u .i ku'i ralju krinu  lo nu mi fapro tu'a zo cikygau kei fa lo du'u pe'i lo jmive po'o cu sipna ja cikna   
               --gejyspa



Jacob Errington

unread,
Jul 6, 2012, 7:02:26 PM7/6/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi darlu

.i zo cikna .e zo sipna ra'a pixra pe'a selsku vau pe'i .i mi tugni la
gejyspa lo du'u zo sipna jikau zo cikna mapti lo na jmive
.i mi pilno zo cando fa'u zo tolcando va'ofa'uva'o

.i mu'o mi'e la tsani
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "lojban" group.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 12, 2012, 2:43:16 PM7/12/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Ok, this one is confusing me, too:

co'a lo nu tolmanku cu viska lo nu da pu zvati lo nenri kei ki'u lo du'u na ku ro da stali lo pu te setca

"As it began to get lighter, it could be seen that someone had been inside, because it wasn't true that everyone of those someones were staying in the former insertion site."
???

                 --gejyspa
 

Jacob Errington

unread,
Jul 12, 2012, 4:46:20 PM7/12/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
I think that's probably just a variable name error. The second {da}
was probably meant to be {de}: "because it isn't true that everything
stays where it was put".
I know for sure that my mental stack doesn't keep track of how many
logically quantified variables I've used, and I just sort of default
to {da} whenever I need one. Again, I think that's the problem.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 12, 2012, 6:04:30 PM7/12/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Yeah, it should have been {ro de}. Also, I think I accidently wrote setca instead of punji. So the sentence is:

co'a lo nu tolmanku cu viska lo nu da pu zvati lo nenri kei ki'u lo du'u na ku ro de stali lo pu te punji
"Starting when it was bright, they (the seven dwarfs) saw that someone had been inside, because not everything was where it had been put."

.i ke'u ckire fi lo nu srera jungau .i ba'o dragau

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 13, 2012, 9:15:57 AM7/13/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:04 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 12.07.2012 20:43, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

Ok, this one is confusing me, too:

co'a lo nu tolmanku cu viska lo nu da pu zvati lo nenri kei ki'u lo du'u na ku ro da stali lo pu te setca

"As it began to get lighter, it could be seen that someone had been inside, because it wasn't true that everyone of those someones were staying in the former insertion site."

Yeah, it should have been {ro de}. Also, I think I accidently wrote setca instead of punji. So the sentence is:

co'a lo nu tolmanku cu viska lo nu da pu zvati lo nenri kei ki'u lo du'u na ku ro de stali lo pu te punji
"Starting when it was bright, they (the seven dwarfs) saw that someone had been inside, because not everything was where it had been put."

.i ke'u ckire fi lo nu srera jungau .i ba'o dragau

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

  Ah, okay, sorry.  I wasn't being deliberately dense.  I usually try to offer helpful suggestions.I mean, I understood the da->de confusion, but I couldn't figure out  what in the world the "te setca" was referring to.  Thanks for the explanation.  Maybe se ponse (be lo trocrida) instead of de, and/or at least a second sumti place for te setca/punci ("...lo pu te punji be de(/ri, if se ponse is used)")

               --gejyspa


                     

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 13, 2012, 9:16:45 AM7/13/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Michael Turniansky <mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah, okay, sorry.  I wasn't being deliberately dense.  I usually try to offer helpful suggestions.I mean, I understood the da->de confusion, but I couldn't figure out  what in the world the "te setca" was referring to.  Thanks for the explanation.  Maybe se ponse (be lo trocrida) instead of de, and/or at least a second sumti place for te setca/punci ("...lo pu te punji be de(/ri, if se ponse is used)")

punci -> punji, of course.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:21:21 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
 "lo torcrida tai gleki se mu'i lo nu cikygau na gi'e sipna stali curmi"
"lu ta'i ma nerkla lo mi'a zdani —sei lo torcrida cu stali retsku li'u"

  It seems to me that you are trying to use "stali"  in a sense of "to continue to do something".  That's not what it means.  It means to remain with or at someplace ("he remained home", "The smell of grapes linger on his hands") You are probably more interested in the tense "ca'o" or the gismu "ranji".

      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:29:28 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 23.07.2012 15:21, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
�"lo torcrida tai gleki se mu'i lo nu cikygau na gi'e sipna stali curmi"
"lu ta'i ma nerkla lo mi'a zdani �sei lo torcrida cu stali retsku li'u"

� It seems to me that you are trying to use "stali" �in a sense of "to continue to do something". �That's not what it means. �It means to remain with or at someplace ("he remained home", "The smell of grapes linger on his hands") You are probably more interested in the tense "ca'o" or the gismu "ranji".

I meant stodi.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:39:08 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 15:21, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
 "lo torcrida tai gleki se mu'i lo nu cikygau na gi'e sipna stali curmi"
"lu ta'i ma nerkla lo mi'a zdani —sei lo torcrida cu stali retsku li'u"

  It seems to me that you are trying to use "stali"  in a sense of "to continue to do something".  That's not what it means.  It means to remain with or at someplace ("he remained home", "The smell of grapes linger on his hands") You are probably more interested in the tense "ca'o" or the gismu "ranji".

I meant stodi.


  Okay.  

  Next one:  i ku'i lo noltruni'u ba lo nu citka lo fepri .e lo livga vu'o noi ny krici fi ke'a fe lo du'u pagbu la snime blabi cu jinvi lo du'u di'a ku pa moi lo melbi gi'e mlerai 

  Absolutely nothing wrong here, and it's purely a stylistic choice, but just wondering why you didn't use the simpler "....ny krici lo du'u [ke'a] pagbu la snime blabi...", which would have accomplished the same thing, without having to bring in the "fi ke'a", which then necessitated you also adding in the word "fe".
    --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:48:17 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"lu doi ga'i nai noltruni'u do vi mlerai
.i ku'i la snime blabi ne ti'a lo cmana
zi'e ne bu'u lo ze torcrida
cu mlemau fo lo pilji be li ki'o"

  How could the queen be at the same time most beautiful and Snow White yet more beautiful?  (Well, of course, the answer is dependent on what the se mlerai is.  If we presume it was the same as the queen's question (lo ro se gugde), the Snow White must perforce not be in that set, so she is not a member of that country's peoples. ;-) )  (Actually, the more accurate response would be "...do vi mlerai da'a lo se go'i....", but I'm not inclined to split hairs (yeah, right!)
      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:49:19 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 23.07.2012 15:39, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:29 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 15:21, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
�"lo torcrida tai gleki se mu'i lo nu cikygau na gi'e sipna stali curmi"
"lu ta'i ma nerkla lo mi'a zdani �sei lo torcrida cu stali retsku li'u"

� It seems to me that you are trying to use "stali" �in a sense of "to continue to do something". �That's not what it means. �It means to remain with or at someplace ("he remained home", "The smell of grapes linger on his hands") You are probably more interested in the tense "ca'o" or the gismu "ranji".

I meant stodi.


� Okay. �

� Next one: �i ku'i lo noltruni'u ba lo nu citka lo fepri .e lo livga vu'o noi ny krici fi ke'a fe lo du'u pagbu la snime blabi cu jinvi lo du'u di'a ku pa moi lo melbi gi'e mlerai�

� Absolutely nothing wrong here, and it's purely a stylistic choice, but just wondering why you didn't use the simpler "....ny krici lo du'u [ke'a] pagbu la snime blabi...", which would have accomplished the same thing, without having to bring in the "fi ke'a", which then necessitated you also adding in the word "fe".

Stylistic choice. I just like the construction. I don't always go for the shortest possible sentence. I like how the fi ke'a version first introduces the subject and then talks about it in more detail.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 9:59:54 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 23.07.2012 15:48, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
"lu doi ga'i nai noltruni'u do vi mlerai
.i ku'i la snime blabi ne ti'a lo cmana
zi'e ne bu'u lo ze torcrida
cu mlemau fo lo pilji be li ki'o"

� How could the queen be at the same time most beautiful and Snow�White�yet more beautiful? �(Well, of course, the answer is dependent on what the se mlerai is. �If we presume it was the same as the queen's question (lo ro se gugde), the Snow White must perforce not be in that set, so she is not a member of that country's peoples. ;-) ) �(Actually, the more accurate response would be "...do vi mlerai da'a lo se go'i....", but I'm not inclined to split hairs (yeah, right!)

.u'i. That would destroy the effect the original has. They are obviously not in the same set. The mirror knows this and says "You are the prettiest of the people around here (implicit), but Snow White exceeds you". The mirror uses two sets because it is necessary to distinguish or else it loses the effect / parallelism to the original.

lo jbogu'e cu jai bu'u ta'e ralci tcila lanli .i mi na se spaji


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 10:22:08 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
  I

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:59 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 15:48, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
"lu doi ga'i nai noltruni'u do vi mlerai
.i ku'i la snime blabi ne ti'a lo cmana
zi'e ne bu'u lo ze torcrida
cu mlemau fo lo pilji be li ki'o"

  How could the queen be at the same time most beautiful and Snow White yet more beautiful?  (Well, of course, the answer is dependent on what the se mlerai is.  If we presume it was the same as the queen's question (lo ro se gugde), the Snow White must perforce not be in that set, so she is not a member of that country's peoples. ;-) )  (Actually, the more accurate response would be "...do vi mlerai da'a lo se go'i....", but I'm not inclined to split hairs (yeah, right!)

.u'i. That would destroy the effect the original has. They are obviously not in the same set. The mirror knows this and says "You are the prettiest of the people around here (implicit), but Snow White exceeds you". The mirror uses two sets because it is necessary to distinguish or else it loses the effect / parallelism to the original.

lo jbogu'e cu jai bu'u ta'e ralci tcila lanli .i mi na se spaji


  But, actually, I don't think I've ever seen an (English) version of the story where the mirror's response at this point in the story is that the queen is the fairest/prettiest.  Usually that she is fair, but Snow is fairer by far.  So even those authors recognize the mirror can't use the superlative regarding the queen.

        --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 10:34:31 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 23.07.2012 16:22, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
> But, actually, I don't think I've ever seen an (English) version of
> the story where the mirror's response at this point in the story is
> that the queen is the fairest/prettiest. Usually that she is fair,
> but Snow is fairer by far. So even those authors recognize the mirror
> can't use the superlative regarding the queen.

Okay, but I have the German "original"[1] version from 1905, and it,
just like any other ones I've seen, do say that the queen is the most
beautiful:

"Frau K�nigin, ihr seid die Sch�nste hier,
aber Schneewittchen �ber den Bergen
bei den sieben Zwergen
ist noch tausendmal sch�ner als ihr."

"O Queen, you are the most beautiful here,
but Snow White [...]
is yet a thousand times more beatiful than you."

So it does use two sets :P. It might just be a language thing zo'o

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

---
[1] The Grimm Brothers didn't invent the story, they just collected it
from people who knew it and then made their own version. Calling one
version or another original isn't really possible.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 23, 2012, 10:41:39 AM7/23/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:34 AM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 23.07.2012 16:22, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

  But, actually, I don't think I've ever seen an (English) version of the story where the mirror's response at this point in the story is that the queen is the fairest/prettiest.  Usually that she is fair, but Snow is fairer by far.  So even those authors recognize the mirror can't use the superlative regarding the queen.

Okay, but I have the German "original"[1] version from 1905, and it, just like any other ones I've seen, do say that the queen is the most beautiful:

"Frau Königin, ihr seid die Schönste hier,
aber Schneewittchen über den Bergen
bei den sieben Zwergen
ist noch tausendmal schöner als ihr."


"O Queen, you are the most beautiful here,
but Snow White [...]
is yet a thousand times more beatiful than you."

So it does use two sets :P. It might just be a language thing zo'o


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

---
[1] The Grimm Brothers didn't invent the story, they just collected it from people who knew it and then made their own version. Calling one version or another original isn't really possible.



  My apologies.  I completely glossed over the "vi" in your version.  You are fine and correct. I withdraw my objection.
         --gejyspa
 

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 11:44:51 AM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
".i ny za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu ca'a mlerai be ro lo selgu'e cu na surla kakne ri'a lo nu jilra"

(first, I should note that on a grammatical note, genrei doesn't like it without a "boi" or "cu" between "ny" and "re'u" since they otherwise form into a single lerfu string.  jboski (online jbofi'e), OTOH, has no problem with it.  I"m not sure what the "correct" interpretation is according to the formal grammar)

pensi-2's are normally considered to be ideas, not events, so it should be si'o, not nu, for those who are pedantic about such stuff.  But more importantly, I'm again having trouble getting the proper sense of the sentence.  I think you are trying to say that she is once again thinking about how to kill (Snow White) because she is not able to relax because  she is no longer the most beautiful in the land, due to her jealousy.  Which I guess works, but it's real hard for me to puzzle out the convolutions of the sentence due to the nested modals and tenses

          --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 12:09:29 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" i tai ku klama fo lo ze cmana fe lo ze torcrida gi'e snadarxi lo vorme gi'e lausku «lu lo xamgu ve pleji cu se friti li'u» "

Pedantry again -- shouldn't that be "...fe _lo zdani be_ lo ze torcrida..."?  She didn't go to the dwarves at all.     
 --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 12:16:05 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 24.07.2012 17:44, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
".i ny za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu ca'a mlerai be ro lo selgu'e cu na surla kakne ri'a lo nu jilra"

(first, I should note that on a grammatical note, genrei doesn't like it without a "boi" or "cu" between "ny" and "re'u" since they otherwise form into a single lerfu string.  jboski (online jbofi'e), OTOH, has no problem with it.  I"m not sure what the "correct" interpretation is according to the formal grammar)

It's missing a cu. As I originally said, I did not proof-read the translation, so typos like this one are expected to show up here and there.

pensi-2's are normally considered to be ideas, not events, so it should be si'o, not nu, for those who are pedantic about such stuff. 

You can think about anything. You can think about objects, events, whatever you want. Anything you can hold in your mind can be a pensi2.

But more importantly, I'm again having trouble getting the proper sense of the sentence.  I think you are trying to say that she is once again thinking about how to kill (Snow White) because she is not able to relax because  she is no longer the most beautiful in the land, due to her jealousy.  Which I guess works, but it's real hard for me to puzzle out the convolutions of the sentence due to the nested modals and tenses

It's quite straighforward for me. But I can walk you through it:

.i ny cu za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei
The queen (ny) again thought about how to kill (her)

mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu ca'a mlerai lo ro selgu'e
because, until she was actually the pretties of all the people in the country,

cu na surla kakne
(she) would not be able to relax


ri'a lo nu jilra
because of her envy


I could add some more pro-sumti, but they are obvious enough to me to be elided. I don't like how the na scopes over the ri'a in this sentence, so I'll fix that in the actual text.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 12:39:44 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 24.07.2012 18:09, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" i tai ku klama fo lo ze cmana fe lo ze torcrida gi'e snadarxi lo vorme gi'e lausku «lu lo xamgu ve pleji cu se friti li'u» "

Pedantry again -- shouldn't that be "...fe _lo zdani be_ lo ze torcrida..."?  She didn't go to the dwarves at all.    

This was again carried over from the original where it does say that she goes to the seven dwarfs. The point of this is leitmotif. The phrase "across the seven mountains to the seven dwarfs", which rhymes in the original German, appears several times throughout the story. Inserting a "house of" (zdani be lo) would break up this pattern.
Of course, from a nitpicky point of view, you are right, she does not go to the seven dwarfs, she goes to Snow White.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 1:29:55 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:16 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 24.07.2012 17:44, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
".i ny za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu ca'a mlerai be ro lo selgu'e cu na surla kakne ri'a lo nu jilra"

(first, I should note that on a grammatical note, genrei doesn't like it without a "boi" or "cu" between "ny" and "re'u" since they otherwise form into a single lerfu string.  jboski (online jbofi'e), OTOH, has no problem with it.  I"m not sure what the "correct" interpretation is according to the formal grammar)

It's missing a cu. As I originally said, I did not proof-read the translation, so typos like this one are expected to show up here and there.


   Yeah, I would tend to agree with that.  I just think it interesting that jboski had no problem parsing it (and let's be honest, most humans wouldn't have trouble parsing it, either, tending to think of "z'aure'u" as a single conceptual unit, and since, even if one does take "ny.ra'u" as single unit, the sentence doesn't parse, even a backtracking type of method must realize that that can't be right)
pensi-2's are normally considered to be ideas, not events, so it should be si'o, not nu, for those who are pedantic about such stuff. 

You can think about anything. You can think about objects, events, whatever you want. Anything you can hold in your mind can be a pensi2.


   Again, the pedants (and I don't necessarily say that I'm one) would say that you CAN'T hold a ball in your mind.  You can hold a ball in your hand.  You can only hold the IDEA of a ball in your mind, hence "si'o bolci".  As for me, I've always felt lojban was too strongly "typed" anyhow. 

But more importantly, I'm again having trouble getting the proper sense of the sentence.  I think you are trying to say that she is once again thinking about how to kill (Snow White) because she is not able to relax because  she is no longer the most beautiful in the land, due to her jealousy.  Which I guess works, but it's real hard for me to puzzle out the convolutions of the sentence due to the nested modals and tenses

It's quite straighforward for me. But I can walk you through it:

.i ny cu za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei
The queen (ny) again thought about how to kill (her)

mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu ca'a mlerai lo ro selgu'e
because, until she was actually the pretties of all the people in the country,

cu na surla kakne
(she) would not be able to relax


ri'a lo nu jilra
because of her envy


I could add some more pro-sumti, but they are obvious enough to me to be elided. I don't like how the na scopes over the ri'a in this sentence, so I'll fix that in the actual text.


  So you interpret "co'u X" as meaning "until X"?  Interesting.  So, that's in line with the proposal on http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Aspect+as+of+24+May+2004 To me, I still use the CLL version, which is part of my confusion.  But in any case, I didn't say I couldn't puzzle it out, just that it was difficult.  And yeah, I know you like to elide prosumti x1s in your main bridi, but that's the style of your story, so I didn't suggest changing it.

   --gejyspa


Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 1:37:51 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:39 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 24.07.2012 18:09, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" i tai ku klama fo lo ze cmana fe lo ze torcrida gi'e snadarxi lo vorme gi'e lausku «lu lo xamgu ve pleji cu se friti li'u» "

Pedantry again -- shouldn't that be "...fe _lo zdani be_ lo ze torcrida..."?  She didn't go to the dwarves at all.    

This was again carried over from the original where it does say that she goes to the seven dwarfs. The point of this is leitmotif. The phrase "across the seven mountains to the seven dwarfs", which rhymes in the original German, appears several times throughout the story. Inserting a "house of" (zdani be lo) would break up this pattern.
Of course, from a nitpicky point of view, you are right, she does not go to the seven dwarfs, she goes to Snow White.


  Ah, well then, I fault the Brothers Grimm :-)

  There are other solutions, of course, if you desire greater accuracy, the easiest probably being using fa'a instead of fe. (Or if it's simply the simply in of "lo zdani" BEFORE "lo ze torcrida" that bothers you, you have the choice of using "fe lo po ze torcrida ku zdani" or the like.)  Or, you can simply leave it as is, and make me grind my teeth :-)

        --gejyspa

 

Jonathan Jones

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 1:38:00 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com

I thought "pu'o X" was "until X"...?

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 1:40:06 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
  Yes, that's how the CLL has it, and the way I prefer it, but read the discussion link I posted above, or  http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=ZAhO+as+sumti+tcita for why some don't like it that way.
    --gejyspa

Jacob Errington

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 2:14:48 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
The CLL has ZAhO as sumtcita defined in a way that doesn't really
match up with with other sumtcita. IIRC, CCL says that {brode ZAhO lo
nu broda} == {brode ca lo nu ZAhO broda} which is the only case of the
tag infiltrating the abstraction. That wiki page, which I believe
reflects xorxes's proposal for ZAhO, says that {brode ZAhO ko'a} ==
{ZAhO brode ca ko'a}. Incidentally, that interpretation works for TAhE
too: {broda TAhE ko'a} == {TAhE broda ca ko'a}. Xorxes uses ZAhO in
this way in le cmalu noltru.

mu'o mi'e la tsani

> Yes, that's how the CLL has it, and the way I prefer it, but read the
> discussion link I posted above, or
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=ZAhO+as+sumti+tcita for why
> some don't like it that way.
> --gejyspa
>

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 3:43:15 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" lu lo stace ninmu zo'u .e'a .ei nai mi nerkla curmi li'u» se pensi la snime blabi noi ga'orgau lo vorme gi'e te vecnu lo melbi jongausko"  

 sy  kargau je'u pei je nai ga'orgau

                 --gejyspa

Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 24, 2012, 6:54:39 PM7/24/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:16 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Am 24.07.2012 17:44, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
>>
>> ".i ny za'u re'u pensi lo nu ta'i ma kau catra kei mu'i lo nu co'u lo nu
>> ca'a mlerai be ro lo selgu'e cu na surla kakne ri'a lo nu jilra"
>
> I just think it interesting that
> jboski had no problem parsing it (and let's be honest, most humans wouldn't
> have trouble parsing it, either, tending to think of "z'aure'u" as a single
> conceptual unit, and since, even if one does take "ny.ra'u" as single unit,
> the sentence doesn't parse, even a backtracking type of method must realize
> that that can't be right)

".i ny za'u re'u pensi" is grammatical, even though it doesn't parse
as intended, just like ".i ca pensi", because "ny za'u re'u" is a
tense. If a parser doesn't like it, there is a problem with the
parser.

I have proposed that PA and BY shouldn't combine, since the benefits
of such combinations are much less than the troubles they cause.

>> You can think about anything. You can think about objects, events,
>> whatever you want. Anything you can hold in your mind can be a pensi2.
>
> Again, the pedants (and I don't necessarily say that I'm one) would say
> that you CAN'T hold a ball in your mind.

The x2 of pensi is not for the thought that you hold in your mind but
for whatever that thought is about, It's like the x3 of tavla, or the
x3 of djuno. You can talk or think about pretty much anything.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 25, 2012, 12:08:19 AM7/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com


On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:
".i ny za'u re'u pensi" is grammatical, even though it doesn't parse
as intended, just like ".i ca pensi", because "ny za'u re'u" is a
tense. If a parser doesn't like it, there is a problem with the
parser.

  You mean like in the sense that "vei ny za'u ve'o gerku cu bunre" is grammatical?  I see no evidence to support a lerfu-string-as-mathematical-construct before a ROI.  18.11 doesn't list it, and neither is it mentioned as a possibility in 10.9
     --gejyspa

Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 25, 2012, 7:40:20 AM7/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Oops, you're right. It's not grammatical.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 25, 2012, 1:36:17 PM7/25/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" .i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau ri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne gi'e morsi farlu lo loldi"

ri'a -> se ri'a
        --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 26, 2012, 3:19:45 PM7/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" ni'o ba na'e zu ku ca lo vanci lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani gi'e mutce lo ka se spaji kei ca lo nu viska lo nu la snime blabi cu cpana lo loldi gi'e na muvdu fi'o selmlu lo ka morsi "
  It seems like you are trying to say "not long after..." but unfortunately, "ba na'e zu" is not grammatical  "ba nai zu" is, but may not mean what we want.  I expect you would be better off simply doing "ba za" or "ba zi".
      --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 26, 2012, 3:27:49 PM7/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"ca ku la snime blabi cu co'a linto vasxu gi'e masno binxo lo di'a jmive"

   "linto" means light in mass or weight. It doesn't really work here.  "milxe" is probably better.
      --gejyspa


selpa'i

unread,
Jul 26, 2012, 4:40:58 PM7/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 26.07.2012 21:19, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" ni'o ba na'e zu ku ca lo vanci lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani gi'e mutce lo ka se spaji kei ca lo nu viska lo nu la snime blabi cu cpana lo loldi gi'e na muvdu fi'o selmlu lo ka morsi "
  It seems like you are trying to say "not long after..." but unfortunately, "ba na'e zu" is not grammatical  "ba nai zu" is, but may not mean what we want.  I expect you would be better off simply doing "ba za" or "ba zi".

I don't see the problem. NAhE TAG is grammatical, and so is na'e zu.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
-- 
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo .e nai zo lejbo

Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 26, 2012, 6:28:52 PM7/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:40 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 26.07.2012 21:19, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
>
> " ni'o ba na'e zu ku ca lo vanci lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani gi'e mutce
> lo ka se spaji kei ca lo nu viska lo nu la snime blabi cu cpana lo loldi
> gi'e na muvdu fi'o selmlu lo ka morsi "
> It seems like you are trying to say "not long after..." but unfortunately,
> "ba na'e zu" is not grammatical "ba nai zu" is, but may not mean what we
> want. I expect you would be better off simply doing "ba za" or "ba zi".
>
> I don't see the problem. NAhE TAG is grammatical, and so is na'e zu.

"ba [ku] na'e zu ku" is grammatical, but some parsers have trouble
with the elided "ku" in such cases. camxes parses it fine though.
Probably what gejyspa meant is that "ba na'e zu" does not parse as a
single compound tense the way "ba zu" does. This would be solved by
this proposal: http://www.lojban.org/tiki/Internal+grammar+of+tags

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 26, 2012, 6:57:12 PM7/26/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
I am aware of this proposal, and I don't really consider it a "proposal"
as much as a necessity for the language to be consistent, which is why I
pretend it's already "official". There is no way it won't be.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 27, 2012, 9:20:25 AM7/27/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
 mi ckire do lo ka krici tu'a mi kei doi xorxes .iku'isa'u mi je'u uinairo'e na morji lo du'u ka'e pilno cei broda zo na'e ce'o lo cmavo be zoi gy tense gy .i mi no roi broda .i mi pilno zo na'e tu'a fu'e po'o lo selbri ku jo'u lo sumti  .i da'i mi djica lo nu dutygau lo cmavo .ibo mi pilno zo nai .i mi ckire re do lo nu mojgau mi

           --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 27, 2012, 3:59:46 PM7/27/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"lo torcrida ca lo nu tirna lo du'u ma kau pu fasnu cu cusku «lu lo tolci'o te zarci cu me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u..."


I assume "ca lo nu tirna lo du'u ma kau pu fasnu" is intended to be "when they heard what happened" .  But I have a few problems with it.  I don't think you can "tirna" a "lo du'u"  And in any case, the import of the sentence is really when they found out or were informed of what happened, so I'd suggest "ca lo nu facki fi lo pu fasnu"  or "ca lo nu se jungau fo lo pu fasnu" If you really want to emphasize the aural nature of their information transfer, you could "do ca lo nu tirna tu'a lo pu fasnu" (also, you might use "selfri" instead of "fasnu" in any of the above)

As for "...me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u"  That means the tradesperson is one of the zero amount of non-"godless queen"  I understand you are trying to go for "none other than the godless queen", but I don't think you can do it that way.  You are trying to state someone is a member of a 0 cardinality set, I believe.  I understand you want to get the emphasis connoted by the original.  I think maybe   "lo tolci'o ja'a du lo cevycau noltruni'u" would do the same.

   --gejyspa

Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 27, 2012, 6:18:27 PM7/27/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "lo torcrida ca lo nu tirna lo du'u ma kau pu fasnu cu cusku «lu lo tolci'o
> te zarci cu me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u..."
>
> I assume "ca lo nu tirna lo du'u ma kau pu fasnu" is intended to be "when
> they heard what happened" . But I have a few problems with it. I don't
> think you can "tirna" a "lo du'u"

Presumably you could say "ca lo nu tirna lo se du'u ma kau pu fasnu".

> And in any case, the import of the
> sentence is really when they found out or were informed of what happened, so
> I'd suggest "ca lo nu facki fi lo pu fasnu" or "ca lo nu se jungau fo lo pu
> fasnu" If you really want to emphasize the aural nature of their information
> transfer, you could "do ca lo nu tirna tu'a lo pu fasnu" (also, you might
> use "selfri" instead of "fasnu" in any of the above)

Or "ca lo nu facki lo du'u ma kau fasnu".

> As for "...me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u" That means the tradesperson
> is one of the zero amount of non-"godless queen" I understand you are
> trying to go for "none other than the godless queen", but I don't think you
> can do it that way. You are trying to state someone is a member of a 0
> cardinality set, I believe. I understand you want to get the emphasis
> connoted by the original. I think maybe "lo tolci'o ja'a du lo cevycau
> noltruni'u" would do the same.

"... du no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u" does work though.

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 30, 2012, 11:46:05 AM7/30/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Michael Turniansky
> As for "...me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u"  That means the tradesperson
> is one of the zero amount of non-"godless queen"  I understand you are
> trying to go for "none other than the godless queen", but I don't think you
> can do it that way.  You are trying to state someone is a member of a 0
> cardinality set, I believe.  I understand you want to get the emphasis
> connoted by the original.  I think maybe   "lo tolci'o ja'a du lo cevycau
> noltruni'u" would do the same.

"... du no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u" does work though.

  Does it?

 ni'o
" ku'i ui na ru'e vanci ja'e lo nu ba zi ku lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani"
  
na modifies the vanci bridi.  I don't think that's what you wanted.  You probably meant "ui ru'e nai".  Judging by the original German, I think you want the non-official "fu'au"

BTW, thanks for using my coinage "ticta'u"   That makes the second time it's been used in written context.  (The first was my translation of the lyrics of "Comedy Tonight")
        --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Jul 30, 2012, 2:58:12 PM7/30/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 30.07.2012 17:46, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

ni'o
" ku'i ui na ru'e vanci ja'e lo nu ba zi ku lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani"
  
na modifies the vanci bridi.  I don't think that's what you wanted.  You probably meant "ui ru'e nai".  Judging by the original German, I think you want the non-official "fu'au"

I did want na to modify the bridi. I know how to use UI NAI. =) I did have to insert an .i though to fix the scope.

BTW, thanks for using my coinage "ticta'u"   That makes the second time it's been used in written context.

You're welcome.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 30, 2012, 3:36:29 PM7/30/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 2:58 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 30.07.2012 17:46, schrieb Michael Turniansky:

ni'o
" ku'i ui na ru'e vanci ja'e lo nu ba zi ku lo ze torcrida cu xruti lo zdani"
  
na modifies the vanci bridi.  I don't think that's what you wanted.  You probably meant "ui ru'e nai".  Judging by the original German, I think you want the non-official "fu'au"

I did want na to modify the bridi. I know how to use UI NAI. =) I did have to insert an .i though to fix the scope.


  Ah, I see there is some user support for the construct "na ru'e"  ( http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?topics_offset=1&forumId=1&comments_parentId=7384&fullscreen=y ) for "almost".  But I don't like it, and I also don't see it supported in official places like the CLL and  http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Intensifiers .... I would have used jibni vanci or pu'o vanci
 
         --gejyspa

 


Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 30, 2012, 6:35:48 PM7/30/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> "... du no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u" does work though.
>>
> Does it?

Yes:

ko'a du no na'e bo lo noltruni'u
= ko'a du no da poi ke'a na du lo noltruni'u
= no da poi ke'a na du lo noltruni'u zo'u ko'a du da
There's no X distinct from the queen such that ko'a is X.

That only leaves the queen for ko'a to be.

Jorge Llambías

unread,
Jul 30, 2012, 6:50:27 PM7/30/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ah, I see there is some user support for the construct "na ru'e" (
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?topics_offset=1&forumId=1&comments_parentId=7384&fullscreen=y
> ) for "almost". But I don't like it, and I also don't see it supported in
> official places like the CLL and
> http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Intensifiers .... I would have
> used jibni vanci or pu'o vanci

"pu'o" works for temporal "almost", but not in general. It wouldn't
work for "almost white" for example.

"jibni vanci" is a type of "vanci", isn't it? But "almost X" is a type
of "not X", not a type of "X". You could use "vanci jibni" or "jibni
lo vanci" if you don't like "na ru'e". And you need to find something
for its companion "ja'a ru'e" = "barely", presumably "jibni na'e bo
..."

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Jul 31, 2012, 11:13:14 AM7/31/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"  lo seftu cu melbi co skari lo blabi joi ke xunre barna "
  Typo -- seftu -> sefta.
       --gejsypa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 2, 2012, 1:06:23 PM8/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" .i lafti by gi'e sisku tu'a lo vindu kei fau lo nu luzgau lo se dasni skori kei .e lo nu kompli fi lo kerfa kei .e lo nu lumci ny fo lo djacu .e lo vanju ."

First kei is incorrect.  No abstractor to terminate.

ny should be by (or ky), unless the queen snuck in here somehow ;-)

Also, while "kompli" is a nonce creation, we can probably assume lo te kompli cu panra lo te pilno, and needs to be an abstraction, so you should "tu'a" lo kerfa

       --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 2, 2012, 1:43:12 PM8/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com

"lo xendo verba cu morsi gi'e stali lo ka morsi"

 As before, you meant stodi, not stali or, if you prefer, a tense like ca'o
        --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 2, 2012, 1:46:22 PM8/2/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" .i lo torcrida cu punji ny lo mrota'o gi'e stizu sruri gi'e klaku fi tu'a ny gi'e klaku ze'a lo djedi be li ci"

once again ny->by (twice)
        --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 12:13:23 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" ni'o la snime blabi cu ze'u ze'u cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau gi'e fusra na gi'e ja'a simlu lo ka sipna"

  1)  "ze'u ze'u" is not recognized by genrei or jobski.  If it is in fact not permissible, might I suggest "ba'e ze'u"?

  2)  You got tripped up here due to the default grouping of multiple logical connectives.  This says that she was "not (both lying a long time in the coffin and decaying) but seemed to be sleeping"  In other words, she either was not lying a long time in the coffin, or not decaying, or perhaps both.  Not what you wanted. Stick a "bo" after the second gi'e to solve that.

        --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 1:02:56 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" ja'o ko dunda mi"

  I don't think ja'o really fits here.  I think you really want ".i se ni'i bo" or ".i se ki'u bo"  (or if you prefer, "ni'i/ki'u lo du'u go'i kei ko dunda mi") If I can't pay you for her, therefore give her to me. I'm not sure what an evidential would mean in an imperative sentence.   Consider, could you put e.g. "ti'e" there?  What would mean? Also, "mi" should be the te dunda, not the se dunda.

     --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 2:17:25 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 03.08.2012 18:13, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" ni'o la snime blabi cu ze'u ze'u cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau gi'e fusra na gi'e ja'a simlu lo ka sipna"

  1)  "ze'u ze'u" is not recognized by genrei or jobski.  If it is in fact not permissible, might I suggest "ba'e ze'u"?

Any combination of TAGs is fine. Anything else would be madness. Still, I changed it to "ze'u sai".


  2)  You got tripped up here due to the default grouping of multiple logical connectives.  This says that she was "not (both lying a long time in the coffin and decaying) but seemed to be sleeping"  In other words, she either was not lying a long time in the coffin, or not decaying, or perhaps both.  Not what you wanted. Stick a "bo" after the second gi'e to solve that.

That's one way. I just moved the na in front of fusra instead.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 2:36:28 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:17 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.08.2012 18:13, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" ni'o la snime blabi cu ze'u ze'u cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau gi'e fusra na gi'e ja'a simlu lo ka sipna"

  1)  "ze'u ze'u" is not recognized by genrei or jobski.  If it is in fact not permissible, might I suggest "ba'e ze'u"?

Any combination of TAGs is fine. Anything else would be madness. Still, I changed it to "ze'u sai".

   If you want to use it as a tag, then instead of "....cu ze'u ze'u  cpana..." use "....ze'u cu ze'u cpana"  or "ze'u ku ze'u cpana..." The problem you are encountering is that within the selbri (to the right of the cu) it's NOT a tag, but a subsidiary tense.
  

  2)  You got tripped up here due to the default grouping of multiple logical connectives.  This says that she was "not (both lying a long time in the coffin and decaying) but seemed to be sleeping"  In other words, she either was not lying a long time in the coffin, or not decaying, or perhaps both.  Not what you wanted. Stick a "bo" after the second gi'e to solve that.

That's one way. I just moved the na in front of fusra instead.


  That works, too.  (No comments on my other emails?)

      --gejyspa  

selpa'i

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 2:42:51 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 03.08.2012 20:36, schrieb Michael Turniansky:


On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:17 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 03.08.2012 18:13, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
" ni'o la snime blabi cu ze'u ze'u cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau gi'e fusra na gi'e ja'a simlu lo ka sipna"

  1)  "ze'u ze'u" is not recognized by genrei or jobski.  If it is in fact not permissible, might I suggest "ba'e ze'u"?

Any combination of TAGs is fine. Anything else would be madness. Still, I changed it to "ze'u sai".

   If you want to use it as a tag, then instead of "....cu ze'u ze'u  cpana..." use "....ze'u cu ze'u cpana"  or "ze'u ku ze'u cpana..." The problem you are encountering is that within the selbri (to the right of the cu) it's NOT a tag, but a subsidiary tense.

In my opinion, there is no (semantical) difference between sumtcita and selbri tcita.
TAG broda = TAG zo'e broda = TAG ku broda.
The placement of cu is purely a grammatical thing, it has no bearing on meaning. It just so happens that non-filled TAGs right before the selbri get merged with them to allow things like lo TAG broda etc.

  

  2)  You got tripped up here due to the default grouping of multiple logical connectives.  This says that she was "not (both lying a long time in the coffin and decaying) but seemed to be sleeping"  In other words, she either was not lying a long time in the coffin, or not decaying, or perhaps both.  Not what you wanted. Stick a "bo" after the second gi'e to solve that.

That's one way. I just moved the na in front of fusra instead.


  That works, too.  (No comments on my other emails?)

I don't want to comment on every single one with the same single line every time: "Thanks, I corrected it" :) I do read all of them. When I don't agree with something, I comment on it.


mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 2:53:19 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
  Okay that's fine.  Just didn't want to feel like I've been wasting my time writing 'em.
      --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 3:12:43 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com

"  .i ca lo nu cusku di'u kei lo torcrida cu cinmo lo ka kecti kei gi'e dunda lo mrovau"
  Strictly speaking, "di'u" here at this level refers to the whole ".i lo noltrunau bersa cu cusku lu...li'u" "la'e di'u" or "lo se go'i" would be better.

         --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 3, 2012, 3:13:59 PM8/3/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
" .i lo noltrunau bersa cu gasnu lo nu lo ri selfu cu bevri fi'o cpana lo janco"
 cpana -> se cpana
      --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 6, 2012, 10:10:49 AM8/6/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
"i ri'a bo lo plise spisa noi pu se batfendi la snime blabi cu muvdu lo bartu be lo galxe"

".i ri'a bo" -> ".i se ri'a bo"

     --gejyspa

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Aug 6, 2012, 11:12:23 AM8/6/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Finished.  Well done, sir.  (And typically gruesome Grmm ending there....)
      --gejyspa

selpa'i

unread,
Aug 6, 2012, 11:18:11 AM8/6/12
to loj...@googlegroups.com
Am 06.08.2012 17:12, schrieb Michael Turniansky:
> Finished. Well done, sir. (And typically gruesome Grmm ending there....)

Thank you! And thanks for all the corrections. Yeah, it's not Grimm
without somebody dying horribly. :P

v4hn

unread,
Mar 27, 2013, 2:21:56 PM3/27/13
to loj...@googlegroups.com
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:12:08AM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
> coi ro do
>
> ni'o uo mi mo'u fanva la snime blabi

.uesai pu ba'e zu go'i

> .i judri fa zoi zoi.
> www.lojban.org/tiki/la+snime+blabi .zoi .i .a'o cinri gi'e pluka vau
> da .i mi pu'o ku ge srera sisku gi dragau da'i .i ku'i .e'a ro da
> xa'o tcidu .i .e'a ko mi jungau lo da'i se srera
> ni'o ma ro do se jinvi

.i mi puzi tcidu jai mulno .u'i
ki'esai la selpa'i mi mutce nelci

.i ku'i mi pu se nabmi lonu jimpe so'o lo jufra kei gi'e
pu tcidu le ji'a dotco ke krasi se cukta.

di'e ve skicu le mi nabmi .i .uenai la'a do ba toljundi so'e ny
.i mi na se raktu la'e di'u
.i da'i do na jimpe so'o ny nagi'a ko te preti


tai binxo lo se sanji jai nandu =>
binxo lo se sanji jai nandu

la snime blabi noi ga'orgau lo vorme =>
la snime blabi noi kargau lo vorme

.i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau ri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne =>
.i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau seri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne

lo tolci'o te zarci cu me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u =>
That construct is just confusing to me...
lo tolci'o te zarci cu na'e drata be lo cevycau noltruni'u

la snime blabi cu ba'o di'a jmive =>
la snime blabi za'o jmive / la snime blabi di'a jmive

la uu snime blabi cu pensi no da =>
la uu snime blabi cu pensi no lo xlali

lo nixli cu tolsanji farlu lo loldi =>
{tolsanji} is not really "unconscious", is it? Unconscious _of what_ in this context?
lo nixli cu tolcikna farlu lo loldi

.i ku'i ui na ru'e vanci =>
.i ku'i uiru'e bazi vanci

co'a sanli ne'a lo minra =>
co'a sanli ca'u lo minra

lo noltruni'u ca lo nu tu'a lo plise cu bredi cu skari cnegau lo flira =>
lo noltruni'u ca lo nu lo plise cu bredi cu skari cnegau lo flira

binxo lo simlu be lo ka te cange ninmu kei gi'e tai klama fo lo ze cmana =>
binxo lo simlu be lo ka te cange ninmu kei gi'e klama taiku fo lo ze cmana

.i pa lo torcrida cu ro roi stali gi'e bandu zgana =>
.i roroi pa lo torcrida cu stali gi'e bandu zgana

.i pa mai lo cipnrstrigi .i re mai ... .i ro mai =>
.i pa moi ..

la snime blabi cu ze'u sai cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau =>
la snime blabi cu ze'u sai stali bu'u lo nenri be lo mrovau

lo mudri [ebony] => .. lo persimo / .. du'i lo mudrnboni / ...
(the first occurence even translates as "black ebony" in the original) => lo xekri persimo?

mi'a na dunda va'o ji'a sai lo nu se pleji ro lo solji pe lo munje ...
ko fi mi dunda =>
One of these needs changing. The original translates roughly as "We'll not give it away for
all the gold of the world. .. Then make it a gift to me", which is not easy to grasp
with using {dunda} twice(mainly because the {va'o..} could be implicit.
Maybe it's closer to the text to use {vecnu/pleji} in the first sentence?

do mi zvati => do zvati ne'a mi

la snime blabi [...] co'a sanli =>
The original is "she sat up". I was really puzzled about how she would _stand up_
on the glass coffin that is being carried. I got no idea how to translate "sat up" though.

.au do mi speni => .au do mi ba speni


mi'e la .van. mu'o

selpa'i

unread,
Mar 31, 2013, 12:21:48 PM3/31/13
to loj...@googlegroups.com
la .van. cu cusku di'e
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:12:08AM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
>> coi ro do
>>
>> ni'o uo mi mo'u fanva la snime blabi
>
> .uesai pu ba'e zu go'i

ie

>> ni'o ma ro do se jinvi
>
> .i mi puzi tcidu jai mulno .u'i
> ki'esai la selpa'i mi mutce nelci

mi do ckire lo nu tcidu

> .i ku'i mi pu se nabmi lonu jimpe so'o lo jufra kei gi'e
> pu tcidu le ji'a dotco ke krasi se cukta.
>
> di'e ve skicu le mi nabmi .i .uenai la'a do ba toljundi so'e ny

(to �lu so'e boi ny li'u� drani toi)

> .i mi na se raktu la'e di'u
> .i da'i do na jimpe so'o ny nagi'a ko te preti

(to si'a �lu so'o boi ny li'u� co'e toi)

> tai binxo lo se sanji jai nandu =>
> binxo lo se sanji jai nandu

ua nai .i xu do tolzau zo tai

> la snime blabi noi ga'orgau lo vorme =>
> la snime blabi noi kargau lo vorme

ki'e .i ji'a zo ku selcau .i drani ja'o fa �lu la snime blabi ku noi
kargau lo vorme li'u�

> .i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau ri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne =>
> .i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau seri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne

ie

> lo tolci'o te zarci cu me no na'e bo lo cevycau noltruni'u =>
> That construct is just confusing to me...

cizra .i xu do tcidu fi lo tolci'o .i lo me lo cabna moi na vasru lo'u
me no na'e bo le'u .i pu zu basygau zo du zo me

> la snime blabi cu ba'o di'a jmive =>
> la snime blabi za'o jmive / la snime blabi di'a jmive

ie nai .i va'o lo nu do zanru �lu di'a jmive li'u� zo'u: .ei do zanru
�lu ba'o di'a jmive li'u� ji'a

> la uu snime blabi cu pensi no da =>
> la uu snime blabi cu pensi no lo xlali

zo'o za'a dai la snime blabi cu je'u pensi ba'e *no* da

> lo nixli cu tolsanji farlu lo loldi =>
> {tolsanji} is not really "unconscious", is it? Unconscious _of what_ in this context?
> lo nixli cu tolcikna farlu lo loldi

do ma jinvi zo nonsanji .i x1 sanji no da

> .i ku'i ui na ru'e vanci =>
> .i ku'i uiru'e bazi vanci

ie nai .i pu drani

> co'a sanli ne'a lo minra =>
> co'a sanli ca'u lo minra

la'a xagmau

> lo noltruni'u ca lo nu tu'a lo plise cu bredi cu skari cnegau lo flira =>
> lo noltruni'u ca lo nu lo plise cu bredi cu skari cnegau lo flira

je'e

> binxo lo simlu be lo ka te cange ninmu kei gi'e tai klama fo lo ze cmana =>
> binxo lo simlu be lo ka te cange ninmu kei gi'e klama taiku fo lo ze cmana

ua nai .i ma te frica

> .i pa lo torcrida cu ro roi stali gi'e bandu zgana =>
> .i roroi pa lo torcrida cu stali gi'e bandu zgana

�lu ro roi ku pa lo torcrida cu co'e li'o sa'a li'u� drani

> .i pa mai lo cipnrstrigi .i re mai ... .i ro mai =>
> .i pa moi ..

ie nai

> la snime blabi cu ze'u sai cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau =>
> la snime blabi cu ze'u sai stali bu'u lo nenri be lo mrovau

�lu stali lo nenri li'u� ji'a drani .i si'a pe'i lo me zo cpana moi ku
ji'a drani

> lo mudri [ebony] => .. lo persimo / .. du'i lo mudrnboni / ...
> (the first occurence even translates as "black ebony" in the original) => lo xekri persimo?

ju'o cu'i zo mudrnxebani

> mi'a na dunda va'o ji'a sai lo nu se pleji ro lo solji pe lo munje ...
> ko fi mi dunda =>
> One of these needs changing. The original translates roughly as "We'll not give it away for
> all the gold of the world. .. Then make it a gift to me", which is not easy to grasp
> with using {dunda} twice(mainly because the {va'o..} could be implicit.
> Maybe it's closer to the text to use {vecnu/pleji} in the first sentence?

nandu .i nabmi fa lo du'u ge zoi dy. schenken .dy gi zoi dy. geben .dy
zilfanva fo zo dunda .i la'a zo zandu'a simsa zoi dy. schenken .dy gi'e
ku'i ca na sidju .i zo vecnu cizra milxe .i ku'i simlu lo ka drani

ni'o pei �lu
�lu .i lo nu da'i do pleji lo ro solji pe lo munje cu na banzu
lo nu mi'a vecnu li'u� .i lo noltrunau bersa cu cusku �lu va'o
ku ko fi mi zandu'a li'u�
li'u� .i mi nelci

> do mi zvati => do zvati ne'a mi

.i ku'i lo me do moi na panra lo preti .i la snime blabi pu cusku �lu mi
ma zvati li'u� .i .ei lo bersa cu panra spuda

> la snime blabi [...] co'a sanli =>
> The original is "she sat up". I was really puzzled about how she would _stand up_
> on the glass coffin that is being carried. I got no idea how to translate "sat up" though.

�lu la snime blabi cu co'a zutse li'u� .a lu la snime blabi cu tsebi'o
li'u� mapti

> .au do mi speni => .au do mi ba speni

je'e

ni'o ckire do lo nu tcidu gi'e jungau fi lo du'u do ma kau jinvi .i mi
ba galfi lo pagbu poi mi do tugni lo du'u .ei ke'a se galfi

v4hn

unread,
Apr 1, 2013, 8:02:30 AM4/1/13
to loj...@googlegroups.com
coi rodo

.i mi spuda le po'o srana

On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 06:21:48PM +0200, selpa'i wrote:
> la .van. cu cusku di'e
>
> (to «lu so'e boi ny li'u» drani toi)

ju'o je'e .i mi na'e pu jundi

> >tai binxo lo se sanji jai nandu =>
> >binxo lo se sanji jai nandu
>
> ua nai .i xu do tolzau zo tai

.ienai zo tai na vi se nitcu fi'o jinvi mi

> >la uu snime blabi cu pensi no da =>
> >la uu snime blabi cu pensi no lo xlali
>
> zo'o za'a dai la snime blabi cu je'u pensi ba'e *no* da

.ienai .i xu do te mabla djica? .i zo'o mi jinvi lonu sy pensi so'e lo bebna selzu'e

> >lo nixli cu tolsanji farlu lo loldi =>
> >{tolsanji} is not really "unconscious", is it? Unconscious _of what_ in this context?
> >lo nixli cu tolcikna farlu lo loldi
>
> do ma jinvi zo nonsanji .i x1 sanji no da

ki'u ma do na nelci zo tolcikna?
ri vi drani roda .ije lonu ny sanji no da kei na nibli lonu ny tolcikna

> >la snime blabi cu ze'u sai cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau =>
> >la snime blabi cu ze'u sai stali bu'u lo nenri be lo mrovau
>
> «lu stali lo nenri li'u» ji'a drani .i si'a pe'i lo me zo cpana moi
> ku ji'a drani

lu cpana lo nenri li'u na'e drani fi'o jinvi mi .i by vreta ba'e bu'u lo nenri to fe lo mudri toi
gi'enai cpana lo nenri .i lo nenri ku vasru lo vacri .i ta'i ma do vreta lo vacri

> >mi'a na dunda va'o ji'a sai lo nu se pleji ro lo solji pe lo munje ...
> >ko fi mi dunda =>
> >One of these needs changing. The original translates roughly as "We'll not give it away for
> >all the gold of the world. .. Then make it a gift to me", which is not easy to grasp
> >with using {dunda} twice(mainly because the {va'o..} could be implicit.
> >Maybe it's closer to the text to use {vecnu/pleji} in the first sentence?
>
> nandu

.ie je'e .isemu'ibo mi na'e pu stidi

> ni'o pei «lu
> «lu .i lo nu da'i do pleji lo ro solji pe lo munje cu na banzu
> lo nu mi'a vecnu li'u» .i lo noltrunau bersa cu cusku «lu va'o
> ku ko fi mi zandu'a li'u»
> li'u» .i mi nelci

je'e xamgu banzu

> >do mi zvati => do zvati ne'a mi
>
> .i ku'i lo me do moi na panra lo preti .i la snime blabi pu cusku
> «lu mi ma zvati li'u» .i .ei lo bersa cu panra spuda

je'e .iku'i lu do mi zvati li'u toldra .i zo'o sy na cinki gi'e xabju le stedi be by

> >la snime blabi [...] co'a sanli =>
> >The original is "she sat up". I was really puzzled about how she would _stand up_
> >on the glass coffin that is being carried. I got no idea how to translate "sat up" though.
>
> «lu la snime blabi cu co'a zutse li'u» .a lu la snime blabi cu
> tsebi'o li'u» mapti

mi nelci zo tsebi'o

selpa'i

unread,
Apr 1, 2013, 9:56:52 AM4/1/13
to loj...@googlegroups.com
la .van. cu cusku di'e
> coi rodo

coi ke'u la .van.

>>> tai binxo lo se sanji jai nandu =>
>>> binxo lo se sanji jai nandu
>>
>> ua nai .i xu do tolzau zo tai
>
> .ienai zo tai na vi se nitcu fi'o jinvi mi

ie pei lo du'u na se nitcu cu na nibli lo du'u na drani .i sa'u mi
zmanei tu'a zo tai

>>> la uu snime blabi cu pensi no da =>
>>> la uu snime blabi cu pensi no lo xlali
>>
>> zo'o za'a dai la snime blabi cu je'u pensi ba'e *no* da
>
> .ienai .i xu do te mabla djica? .i zo'o mi jinvi lonu sy pensi so'e lo bebna selzu'e

la snime blabi na mabla .i mi do tugni lo du'u sy by cu so'i roi bebna
te sidbo .i ku'i ca lo ca mokca noi nu nerklacru lo palci ninmu cu pensi
no da (to ba'u ru'e toi) .i lisri .i na saske .i lo krasi prosa cu ve
cusku lo panra be «lu no da li'u» .i mi no'e djica lo nu satci zmadu lo
krasi

>>> lo nixli cu tolsanji farlu lo loldi =>
>>> {tolsanji} is not really "unconscious", is it? Unconscious _of what_ in this context?
>>> lo nixli cu tolcikna farlu lo loldi
>>
>> do ma jinvi zo nonsanji .i x1 sanji no da
>
> ki'u ma do na nelci zo tolcikna?
> ri vi drani roda .ije lonu ny sanji no da kei na nibli lonu ny tolcikna

zo tolcikna zo sipna ma frica .i la snime blabi na sipna .i nonsanji

>>> la snime blabi cu ze'u sai cpana lo nenri be lo mrovau =>
>>> la snime blabi cu ze'u sai stali bu'u lo nenri be lo mrovau
>>
>> «lu stali lo nenri li'u» ji'a drani .i si'a pe'i lo me zo cpana moi
>> ku ji'a drani
>
> lu cpana lo nenri li'u na'e drani fi'o jinvi mi .i by vreta ba'e bu'u lo nenri to fe lo mudri toi
> gi'enai cpana lo nenri .i lo nenri ku vasru lo vacri .i ta'i ma do vreta lo vacri

na'i .i na nenri lo mrovau fa lo po'o vacri .i nenri fa ji'a lo mudri
poi la snime blabi ke'a cpana

>>> do mi zvati => do zvati ne'a mi
>>
>> .i ku'i lo me do moi na panra lo preti .i la snime blabi pu cusku
>> «lu mi ma zvati li'u» .i .ei lo bersa cu panra spuda
>
> je'e .iku'i lu do mi zvati li'u toldra .i zo'o sy na cinki gi'e xabju le stedi be by

(to la'a do skudji «lu sy na ku cinki gi'a xabju le stedu be by li'u» .a
«lu sy na ga cinki gi xabju le stedu be by li'u» .i se ju lo se cusku be
do cu se smuni lo du'u ge jitfa fa lo du'u sy cu cinki gi jetnu fa lo
du'u sy xabju le stedu be by toi)

.i .i'a mi galfi fi «lu do lo jibni be mi cu zvati li'u» .i ku'i ui nai
na melbi .i ua mi te sidbo la'e di'u lo drata no'u tu'a «lu do lo me mi
moi cu zvati li'u» .i mansa da'i mi

>>> la snime blabi [...] co'a sanli =>
>>> The original is "she sat up". I was really puzzled about how she would _stand up_
>>> on the glass coffin that is being carried. I got no idea how to translate "sat up" though.
>>
>> «lu la snime blabi cu co'a zutse li'u» .a lu la snime blabi cu
>> tsebi'o li'u» mapti
>
> mi nelci zo tsebi'o

je'e do'u

> mi'e la .van. mu'o

Michael Turniansky

unread,
Apr 30, 2013, 10:33:59 AM4/30/13
to loj...@googlegroups.com

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 2:21 PM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:
.i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau ri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne =>
.i je ku'i lo tolci'o cu sutra je tagji srugau seri'a lo nu la snime blabi co'u vasxu kakne

mi puzu stidi la'e di'u de'i li ze pi'e remu  pi'e renopare uinairo'a

ni'o zoi sitna o mudri [ebony] => .. lo persimo / .. du'i lo mudrnboni / .. sitna zo'u mi noroi pu djuno lo du'u le xekri mudri cu mintu uecai be le slari grute be'o seljutsi .i lo seljmi cu ve ctuca mi fo la lojban 

               --gejyspa

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages