TEXT.INT: pelxi ni'ablo

["Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>]

>Date:         Wed, 22 Sep 1993 18:50:35 BST
>From: Iain Alexander
 <I.Alexander.bra0125%OASIS.ICL.CO.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
>la mark. clsn. cusku di'e

>> pelxi ni'ablo
> ^
>  pelxu ni'ablo

>(and similarly throughout)


Ooooooops.  Must pay more attention to my lists.


>> .i so'i lei go'i(?) lamji xabju(?)
>              ^
>  .i so'i lei go'i cu lamji xabju

Ayup.  The {lei go'i} was an afterthought anyway, and it's too easy to
forget that GOhA has syntax like a brivla.

>> {zgizu'e} ({zgike zukte}) for "play (music)" works for me, as they're
>> acting with a goal: that there be music!

>I'm not so keen on this.  I'd prefer {tigni} to {zukte}, and why not
>just {te zgike}?

Duh!  Of course you're right.  {te zgike} it must be.  I'm particularly
annoyed that I blew this, since one of the things that goes along with what
I said about lujvo is that we should make proper use of the various places
of our selbri.  I rarely see places beyond x3 filled, and even less often
converted, while often concepts we could really use are there.  Again,
better study of the gi'uste is necessary.  It's not enough to know that
{zgike} is "music", but also what {se zgike} and {te zgike} etc are.

Hmm, should {le zgike bende} be replaced with {le/lei te zgike}?  Yields
{le te zgike cu co'a te zgike}, which sounds like a tautology but isn't,
owing to the timelessness of untensed lojban.

>> {frili lifri} in the third verse isn't so hot.  Perhaps {zabna} might be
>> better for "living a life of ease".

>I think {surla} is what's wanted here.

That's not bad...

>> I didn't try to make this singable, so I didn't sweat the meter.

>I don't blame you.

>piro mi'a se zdani le ni'ablo pelxu .ui
>!    !       !  !        !    !      !

>Hmmm - a bit forced.

Yeah.  And should it be {pelxu ni'ablo}?


>Nice one, Mark.

Thanks!!

>co'o mi'e .i,n.

~mark