Re: For And's pleasure

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

> >All in all, it doesn't seem at all egregious. At the same time,
> >I don't see why it is a "logical gem"; it seems pretty
> >straightfoward.
>
> Well, I started with "worse than everything (including itself?)" as the start
> of a "logical gem".

You're right. But you could say that that is a bit of a quibble.
As you would say, the intended meaning would be clear...!

> Then there was the use of "du" in a predicate language
> for a non-equational meaning.

There's no problem with using {du} that way.
It is "du le": "that which was worst of all is the". The only
way to have avoided using {du} would have been to have
 "xlalymau ...... fa le"

> Then the use of a  tense in what is only
> tensed because English isn't tenseless.

I think I'd have needed to see more context to see whether a
reference to past time was really intended.

> An dthe hubris that something is a
> logical gem, merely because it uses lots of daxis (but no prenex, which means
>  that the scopes f these variables are probably quite up in the air).  And
>  finally,
> the two-sentence pair being so helplessly

Why helplessly? The writer may have freely elected to make the
translation close.

> mimicking of colloquial English
> (you left out the second sentence in your comment,  but how se sakli
> IS
> a solid-grease-covering eel, anyway?  Malglico in the extreme, IMNSHO.

For you, everything glico is malglico. But englishiness does not in
itself make bad loglan.

I still think that the smarminess and smugness of the English
quotes was worse than the loglan text itself.

--And