Re: orwell

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

And:
>   suo bua cei prenu zou ro bua ro bua jukydunli
>   ije kui nui suo da poi bua suo de poi bua nuu
>   jukydunli mau nui de da nuu
> means (or would have if I had got it right) "Everyone is
> socially-equal to everyone, but the extent to which each
> of some people, X, is socially-equal to each of some
> people, Y, is less than the extent to which Y is socially-equal
> to X". [It actually says "spidery-equal", but that's a typo.]
>
> > i di'u mi mutce cfipu  i pe'i na gendra
> eo ko gendragau i mi djica loeduu mi pilno lae zoi za termsets za
> pio la kolin

First, I don't see why you want to use a quantifiable predicate.
The prenex says something like "for at least one predicate p,
which is 'prenu'" or something like that. I am not certain that
{cei} should be used there. Its normal use is like {goi} to
be used with {broda}. I really don't understand the need for
quantification over predicates here or in general. You don't do
it in your English translation in any case.

The first sentence is missing a {cu}, but it's easy to understand.

In the second sentence, I think that now I understand what you
want to do. You are missing some terminator, since the {su'o de}
falls in the x2 of {bu'a}, but even so it doesn't work the way
you have it. {mau} is not a sumti connective, which is what you
would need. (Eventually, {mau bo} will be an acceptable connective,
if I get my way.) But termsets are really ugly beasts, they are not
as flexible as you think. Basically, they are things like this:

   ( .... .... .... )-conn-( .... .... .... )

where "conn" is any sumti connective and you can fill the "...."
with any number of sumti you like. You don't have freedom to
take each part of the termset on its own, and the syntax is
with a single {nu'i}, at the beginning, and then two {nu'u}s,
one in the middle and one in the end:

        nu'i da de nu'u .e de da nu'u

Strange, but that's how it is. If {mau bo} was an acceptable sumti
connective (which it is not with the current grammar) then you
could say:

        ije ku'i nu'i da poi bu'a ku'o de poi bu'a nu'u
        maubo de da nu'u jikydunli

But you could say what you want much more simply without termsets
and {bu'a}s. For example:

        ro prenu ro prenu cu jikydunli
        i ku'i su'o prenu su'o prenu cu jikydunly
        mau le nu vo'e vo'a no'a

> >        piro loi prenu cu jikydunsi'u
> >        i ku'i pisu'o ri zmadu loi drata le ka go'i
>
> Which means "The whole of persondom is mutually socially-equal,
> but some of it is more mutually socially-equal than something
> else is".

I think that is more likely for "some are more equal than others"
than your version.

You understand it as meaning "for some X and some Y: X is equal
to Y more than Y is equal to X".

But the English version does not use "equal" as a two place
predicate. It uses it as a one place predicate, and says that
everyone satisfies it, but some do so more than others.

Jorge