Re: Long translation

[cbmvax!uunet!ee.mu.OZ.AU!nsn]

Mark Shoulson, I hereby appoint you to cool-dude-like status for helping me
saturate the list with lojbanistani (the vernacular of the residents of
Lojbanistan, as opposed to lojbani or even (horro!) lojban.) Here's a comment
or two:


>`Al naharot bavel, sham yashavnu gam bakhinu b'zokhrenu et tsion.  `Al
>`aravim b'tokhah talinu kinorotenu.  ki sham sh'elunu shovenu divrei shir
>v'tolalenu simkha, "shiru lanu mishir tzion!" "eick nashir et shir YHVH `al
>admat neikhar?"  'Im 'eshkakhekh y'rushalayim, tishkakh y'mini.  Tidbak
>l'shoni l'khiki 'im lo 'ezk'reikhi, 'im lo 'a`ale et y'rushalayim `al rosh
>simkhati.  Z'khor YHVH livnei edom et yom y'rushalayim, ha'omrim "`Aru,
>`aru, `ad hay'sod bah!"  Bat bavel hash'duda, 'ashrei shey'shalem lakh et
>g'mulekh shegamalt lanu.  'Ashrei sheyokhez v'nifets `olalayikh el hasela.
>
>On the rivers of Babylon, there we sat, also wept, in our remembering Zion.
>On willows therein [i.e. in babylon] we hung our lyres.  For there
>requested of us our captors words of song and our hangings happiness (???
>the Hebrew is very unclear, and not just to me).  "Sing to us of the song
>of Zion!"  "How shall we sing the song of YHVH on an alien's soil?"  If I
>forget you, Jerusalem, [let] my right [hand] forget [zo'e.  usually
>taken to be 'its skill'].  [Let] my tongue stick to my palate if I do not
>remember you, if I don't elevate Jerusalem above my head happiness (or, the
>chief of my joys).  Remember, YHVH, to the children of Edom (Babylon) the
>day of Jersalem, those who say, "Destroy! Destroy! To its foundation!"
>Violated daughter of Babylon, happy (praiseworthy?) be [he] who will pay
>you back the dealings which you dealt with us.  Happy (praiseworth?) be [he]
>who will clutch and dash your suckling infants upon the rock.
>
>
>Kinda violent, no?  But it's short and interesting.  Ready?
>
>ni'oni'oni'o la'elo'u vi lo rirxe be la baVEL. le'u
><(newnewnew) the-referent of "At the rivers of Babel."
>This is okay for the title, right?  Do I need error quotes, or could I use
>lu/li'u?

A single sumti is a grammatical utterance. The error quotes are not needed.

>ni'oni'o
>vi lo rirxe be ko'a goi la baVEL. ki
>mi pu gu'e zutse gi klaku mu'i lenu mi morji la tsi,ION.
The {ki} goes after the {vi}. It's not a terminator, and where it's at
right now is a sumtcita. Don't know what it'd mean with mi as the se tcita,
but as a tense on its own {ki} means "getting back to current reality."

>.i fi loi ricxarava poi nenri ko'a ku fa [tu'a] mi dadri'a lei mi
>zgitcirkinora
><on the mass of 'xarava'-trees which are inside it1, [the act of] we
><hang-cause our mass-of-things-called 'kinor'-music-tools'

Are the trees inside Babylon? I'd have said
.i fi loi tricrxarava. pe vi ko'a fa mi dadri'a leimi zgitutrkinora

I like my le'avla rafsi-cmene joints to be really crunchy. The LLG has allowed
for lujvo to start a le'avla, but don't say how you'd tell apart the lujvo
from the cmene; I went crunchy at the appropriate place. If Lojban wasn't
an American product, and you people trilled your ry. (which I do in Esp),
you'd never dream of using ry. as a hyphen. In your shoes, I would have omitted
the {fa mi}, as well as the {fi} by {te} conversion.

>.i ki cpedu fe mi fa lei kavbu be mi fi lei sanga valsi 
>joi lenu lemi se dandu cu pe'a gleki po'a

I'm 70% certain the {ki} here is wrong, and suspect the "there" is assumed.
See what John says.

>.i paunai mi kakne lenu sanga le selsanga pe le jegvo vi tumla pe le
>fange kei ri'a ma vau .uinaicairo'i .a'onai

{vi le tumla}. I'm not sure of my {paunai}, but can think of nothing better.

>ni'o lenu mi da'i sismo'i do doi .iyrucalo,iim. nibli (se jalge?)
>lenu lemi pritu xance cu sismo'i

Having proposed what I did, I stick by it. Your phrase ain't that bad, but.
If you don't use {lesi'o} in hypotheticals like here, when do you? I'd
much prefer morsisti: forgetting is a cessation, not a kind of remembering.
{sismo'i} makes me think of remembering to stop (indeed, my pseudo-diklujvo
view of the world would necessitate that). I suppose it's safer not to use
{mo'u}.

>.i lemi tance cu se lasna fi le gapru korbi be lemi moklu
>.inaja mi na morji do gi'a na se vajni la .iyrucalo,iim. semau
>le ralju be le'i pluka be mi.

I still don't like {.inaja}; it gives to my mind a very simplistic rendition
of "if". I hate to say this, but I'd prefer the {ralju} expression to be a
tanru.

>ni'o ko morji doi le jegvo sera'a lei lu'a panzi be la .eDOM.
>noi bacru lu ko daspo .i ko daspo ji'e le jicmu [li'u] ku'o 
>le djedi pe la .iyrucalo,iim.
{doi jegvo}. Your use of {sera'a} as a shadow of the x2 of morji is ingenious,
but I have a nagging doubt about it. I think the {ko} should be reassigned
by a {doi} within the utterance.

>ni'o pe'a doi tixnu be la baVEL. noi zo'e vlile tegau ke'a do'u
>se gleki le venfu be tegau do bei ledo se gasnu befi mi vau cai .iunai
>.i se gleki le jgari je marxa be ledo verba sepi'o lo rokci vau cai .iunai
>fa'o

tegau is dead in the 1990 gismu list (and the 1991 cmavo list). I'd go
{ri'i} (the new {lifri} modal) rather than the current passive {gaunai},
and would even go so far as to use this nnewfangled {jai} thing:
noi jairi'i vlile - who was the experiencer in someone's being violent.
{ledo se gasnu} I would substitite by {tu'a do}, which means about the same,
being an abbreviation of {lenu do co'e} (Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.)
{sepi'o} tags an argument of the clutching and smashing, not of the being
happy: {bei sepi'o}

Minor nits. I was damn happy with your translation, Mark, and can only hope
others are as happy with my own stuff. i doi mark mi do carmi sinma

Bye for now.