Re: TEXT: le gunse ku joi le lorxu

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

coi dilyn  i ckire fi tu'a lei pinka

> > i le de'e lisri cu xe fanva lo spano xe fanva be fo le bangrxaimara
>
> First: what are the principles of formation of 'bangrxaimara'?

In order to borrow a word from another language:

1- lojbanize the spelling (the word should end in a vowel).
2- If it starts with a vowel, add an initial x-
3- Choose a lojban gismu as a "classifier". (Common ones would be
   bangu, for languages, cidja for foods, gugde for countries,
   tcadu for cities, etc.)
4- Change the last vowel of the gismu to an r and join it to the rest.
   If this produces a double r, use instead an n, if this causes a
   double n, use any consonant you like (I think). Any consonant can
   be pronounced between n and r, anyway.

That insures that the word can't be taken for a lujvo.

When the original word ends in a consonant, it may be a good idea to use
the vowel dropped from the gismu as the final vowel.  Examples:
tcadrlondonu, pemcrlimriki.

> (Incidentally, what is the English orthography for
> {aimaras}?)

Aymara.

> > .i zuku zuku le fetygunse ku joi le fetlorxu cu tavla simxu .i le gunse
>
> Out of curiousity, how would one rephrase the first bridi without using the
> tanru {tavla simxu}?

I think {simxu le nu tavla}.

> {zunri} should be {zumri} and {gruzi} should be {grusi}, right?

Yes, I'll correct them for the next version.

> > .i le gunse cu spusku lu lei me mi pu se jukpa .i mi glare jukpa ri
> > le nu nerpu'i rori le toknu .i e'u ko jukpa lei me do .i aupei mi
> > bregau le toknu sei le gunse cu cusku li'u
>
> It strikes me as a bit odd to repeat 'le gunse cu cusku', but it's
> properly marked.

Yes, it looks odd in the Spanish version, too, but that's how it seems
to be done in the original. Probably not very elegant in Lojban.

> Shouldn't the paragraph be marked with {ni'o}?

I tend not to use {ni'o}, but you may be right.

> > le toknu .i xu me ti li'u .i ly lebna loi bliku mu'i le nu zbasu
>
> Is {lebna} really right here?  From the gismu list, {lebna} has an x3
> place, the person x2 is taken from; 'seize' seems to be the closest
> English equivalent.  Wouldn't {cpacu} be better?

I agree, I'll change it.

> > .ibabo le gunse cu cusku lu e'u ko klagau lei do panzi ti .i mi'o
>
> In the first bridi, why {ti} instead of {vi}?

{vi} is not quite right because the action {klagau} doesn't happen
nearby. I think {ti} works for "this place".

> Can one person {klama ru'u le toknu} (come around the oven)?

Why not? I don't like the many irrelevant places of {klama}, but what
can I do? Any suggestions for how to say "go around the oven"?

> > .i ki'unai le nu lei lorpanzi cu dunku klaku kei le lorxu na jundi ra
> > gi'e nerpu'i ra le toknu .ibabo ua co'a spoja fa lei betfu be lei
> > lorpanzi .i roroi ca le nu lo betfu cu spoja kei le lorxu cu sruri
> > klama gi'e gleki cusku lu paboi li'u fa'ubo lu reboi li'u fa'ubo
> > lu ciboi li'u fa'ubo lu voboi li'u fa'ubo lu muboi li'u
>
> Now's a good a time as any to inquire about the distinction {lo} vs.
> {le}.

Ah! One of my favorite topics!

        lo lorxu : at least one of all things that are foxes.

        le lorxu : each one of all the things that I'm calling a fox.

        loi lorxu : some fraction (taken as one entity) of the mass
                    of all foxes.
        lei lorxu : the mass of things that I'm calling foxes (taken
                    as one entity).

> Why is it, e.g., {lei betfu} in the second line but {lo betfu} in
> the third?

The difference between using {le} and {lei} is that with {le} the
sentence describes more than one relationship (unless it's the simple
case {le pa lorxu}, while with {lei}, it is always one relationship.

So:

        le ci lorxu cu tavla lo gunse
        Each of the three foxes talks to a goose. (Three events,
        there could be three geese.)

        lei ci lorxu cu tavla lo gunse
        The three foxes (together) talk to a goose.

In my case, I could have said {le betfu be lei lorpanzi}, but that would
emphasize each betfu separately, which was not my intention.

In the other case, I could have said {pa le betfu} instead of {lo
betfu}, but I preferred the shorter one.  In any case, I want to
individuate them:  Every time, that _one_ of the belies explodes...

> I'm not sure why {fa'u} was used in the last bridi, rather than, say,
> {ce'o}.

Because I want them distributed with {ro}, i.e. the first time he said
{paboi}, the second {reboi}, etc. Let me give a shorter example:

        le re prenu cu cusku lu paboi li'u fa'ubo lu reboi li'u
        Each of the two people said "one" respectively "two".

If I had used {ce'o}, it would mean that each person said both.  Or, in
the case of the fox, it would mean that every time he said the whole
series.

> > .ibabo ca le nu le lorxu cu barle'a lei ri panzi le kevna kei le gunse
> > cu mutce darnu bu'u le lalxu  .i le lorxu cu barle'a lei ri panzi noi
> > ba'o tabybi'o
>
> Again, I'd question the use of {lebna}.

I'll change {barle'a} to {barcpa}.

> The spatial tenses confuse me here; earlier, the goose went far away by
> route of the lake; but now the goose is far away _at_ the lake?

Yes, I guess she's in the middle of the lake. What's the problem?

> > .ibabo ly tcefengu gi'e cusku lu ai mi ba sudgau le lalxe li'u .i ly
> > pinxe ce'o pinxe mu'i le nu sudgau le lalxe .i ku'i ki'unai le nu
> > mutce pinxe na snada le nu sudgau le lalxe .i le ly betfu ba'o plana
>
> {lalxe} should be {lalxu}, no?

Oops, yes.

> Could {le ly betfu ba'o plana binxo} also be written {le ly betfu ba'o
> plana} or {le ly betfo ba'o binxo (lo/le) plana}?

{ba'o plana} suggests to me that it is no longer plana, so I don't
think that would be right. The other seems ok, with either {lo} or {le}.

> The meaning of the last two sentences seems very weird to me.  Is
> "The fox dared to go while she was losing water from her back.  She
> cried out in warning, 'Be careful!  Sharp leaf, don't cut me!'" a
> correct translation?  Where's the fox going?  What on earth is a {kinli
> pezli}?

{dar} is the rafsi for {darno}, not {darsi}, so {darkla} would be
"go away".

A {kinli pezli} would be something like a prick, I think. Other
suggestions welcome.

> > .i badri je klaku klama fo le cmana .ize'iku lo kilpezli ly batci
>
> Any particular reason you use the lujvo {kilpelzi} here and the tanru
> {kinli pelzi} above, or is it just stylistic?

No reason, I probably should have used the lujvo both times.

co'o mi'e xorxes