Re: TEXT: le gunse ku joi le lorxu

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

> > > le toknu .i xu me ti li'u .i ly lebna loi bliku mu'i le nu zbasu
>
> I don't know the original... Is it that the fox stole or just found and
> took the blocks (bricks?)?

Something like "looked for and took". Gathered.

> > > .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 a tense and cannot fill a numbered place. ti, on the other hand,
> is a pro-sumti and as such can do so. Look:
> mi klama ti (x1) lo lalxu (x2)   means   I go to the lake.
               x2            x3

[Should be "I come here from the lake"]

> mi klama vi lo lalxu (x*)        means   I go (move around) in the
>                                          vicinity of the lake

I would say {mi klama ne'a lo lalxu} instead, because I prefer to reserve
{vi} for another function, but in any case, the sumti doesn't fall in
one of the numbered places.

> co'a spoja lo betfu   means   For each of the stomacks, it began
> exploding. That depicts five separate processes of exploding, each of
> which is at the beginning point.

What you describe is {co'a spoja fa le betfu}. {lo betfu} only says
that at least one stomach exploded, nothing else.

> co'a spoja loi betfu   means   The stomacks began exploding. That means
> there is one process, which is really a series of explosions of various
> stomacks, which is now beginning.

That would be {lei betfu}. {loi betfu} would be "some stomachs", but you
are right it would be only one process. (You also need a {fa}.)

> The focus of the narrative here is not IMHO on the series of explosions
> of each of the stomacks, but on the point in time when the heat reached
> the level when the stomacks began exploding. (Umm, this got much more
> muddled than I thought. I think I'll let somebody else explain this
> one.)

No, you explained it well. (Also, the explanation of why I used fa'u
was very good.)

> le ly. betfo ba'o binxo lo/le plana   means   The fox's stomack finished
> becoming a/the bloated thing.
...
> The le variant is not what you want, because of its
> definiteness, i.e. There is this thing you know of that you'd describe
> as fat and that is what fox's stomack has turned into. (compare English:
> The cocoon turned into THE new butterfly. How does that sound?)

I don't find the {le} variant too bad. You wouldn't use "the" in English,
but there is no problem in using {le} in Lojban for new referents.
In fact, this is really the only type of case where "the" doesn't go
necessarily to {le}, I think.

> > fo'e mi'e. dilyn. trs,ton.
>
> fa'o, maybe? Yes, I guess so...

{fe'o}, I think. {fa'o} would leave out everything that follows.

> co'o doi dilyn. mi'e. goran.

co'o mi'e xorxes