Date:         Wed, 22 Jan 1992 10:40:08 EST
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" 
Subject:      Genesis 1:1 - 2:3
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan 

Well, I finally reached my goal, getting to Genesis 2:3.  I edited all the
stuff I did before, so you'll see lots of differences from the earlier
version, if you still have it.  I'm pretty sure this is all grammatical,
but I'll have to check closely to make sure it's saying what I want it to
say (all terminators where they belong, etc).

You should note that I am a lousy translator, willing to sacrifice
intelligibility for the impossible-to-obtain fidelity to the original.  I
have done hideous things to keep the word order more or less the same as
the original has it, but I'm a little inconsistent here and there.
Similarly, I like to stick to a particular term for each occurence of a
term in the original.

Since I already did the first few days, I'm going to post all of this but
only talk about the last few days, leastways for now.  I'll need to go over
the earlier stuff, but I'll save that for another time.

-------------
ni'oni'o
ca lemu'e krasi ku finti fa la cevni le tsani .e le terdi
.i le terdi cu na'e seltarmi je kunti
.ijebo manku vi ga'u le condi
.ije le pruxi be la cevni cu fulta ga'u loi djacu
.i bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o gusni li'u
.ijebo gusni
.i zgana fa la cevni le gusni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i fedri'a fa la cevni fo le gusni ku ce le manku (ku)
.i te cmene fa la cevni le gusni zo dinri gi'e te cmene le manku zo nicte
.i vanci .i cerni .i pamei djedi

ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o sligu ne'i loi djacu
gi'e fendi fi lei djacu ku ce lei djacu (ku) li'u
.ije zbasu fa la cevni le sligu
.ijebo fedri'a fo lei djacu poi gapru le sligu ku'o
ce lei djacu poi cnita le sligu
.i zasti
.i te cmene fa la cevni le sligu zo tsani
.i vanci .i cerni .i remoi djedi

ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o se jmaji fa lei djacu poi cnita le tsani
fi pa stuzi
.iseri'abo se viska .e'o fa lei sudytumla li'u
.i zasti
.i te cmene fa la cevni lei sudytumla zo terdi gi'e te cmene lei te jmaji
be lei djacu zo xamsi
.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o ferti fa le terdi loi srasu je spati noi
se tsiju loi tsiju ku'o .e loi grute tricu noi cupra loi grute
noi lo tsiju be ra cu nenri ke'a ku'o ku'o zi'e pe vi le terdi li'u
.i zasti
.i cupra fa le terdi loi srasu je spati noi se tsiju loi jutsi tsiju ku'o
.e loi tricu poi cupra loi grute noi lo tsiju be ra cu nenri ke'a ku'o ku'o
zi'e ne ja'i lera jutsi
.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i vanci .i cerni .i cimoi djedi

ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o tergusni tu'i le tsani sligu
.iseri'abo fendi .e'o fi le'e dinri ku ce le'e nicte
.ije sinxa ce cabysni ce djesni ce nacysni
.i ke'u.e'o tergusni tu'i le tsani sligu (fe) le terdi li'u
.i zasti
.i zbasu fa la cevni le re barda tergusni no'u le barda tergusni poi
turni le'e dinri ku'o jo'u le cmalu tergusni poi turni le'e nicte
ge'u .e loi tarci
.i punji fa la cevni ra le tsani sligu semu'i lenu te gusni lo terdi kei
.e lenu turni le'e dinri .e le'e nicte kei
.e lenu fendi fi le gusni ku ce le manku
.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i vanci .i cerni .i vomoi djedi

ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o ferti fa lei djacu loi so'imei danlu
noi jmive .e loi cipni poi voirli'u ga'u lei terdi tu'i le tsani sligu
li'u
.i finti fa la cevni lei barda xasydanlu .e piro loi jmive poi
befydzu zi'epoi se ferti lei djacu (ku'o) zi'e ne ja'i lora jutsi ge'u
.e piro loi se nalci cipni ne ja'i lori jutsi
.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i cesto'edapma(?!?) ra fa la cevni secu'u lu ko seljbe je
so'imei gi'e se culno lei djacu pe ne'i lei xamsi
.ije .e'o loi cipni cu so'imei tu'i le terdi li'u
.i vanci .i cerni .i mumoi djedi

ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o krasi fa le terdi loi jmive ne ja'i lori
jutsi zi'e no'u loi danlu ku joi loi befydzu ku joi loi terdi jmive
ne ja'i lori jutsi li'u
.i zasti
.i zbasu fa la cevni loi terdi jmive ne ja'i lori jutsi ge'u .e loi danlu
ne ja'i lori jutsi ge'u .e loi dertu befydzu ne ja'i lori jutsi
.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
.i bacru fa la cevni lu .ai mi zbasu loi remna ne ta'i le
se tarmi be mi
.i ra turni ba'a.e'a loi xamsi finpe .e loi tsani cipni .e loi danlu .e
piro loi terdi .e piro loi befydzu noi befydzu loi terdi li'u
.i finti fa la cevni loi remna goi fo'a ne ta'i le tarmi be vo'a
.i seri'a loza'i se tarmi le tarmi be la cevni cu finti fo'a (???)
.i seri'a loza'i nakni ce fetsi cu finti fo'a (???)
.i cesto'edapma(???!!) fo'a fa la cevni
.ije cusku fi fo'a fa la cevni fe lu ko seljbe je so'imei gi'e se culno loi
terdi gi'e jinga ri
.i ko turni loi xamsi finpe .e loi tsani cipni .e piro loi danlu poi
befydzu loi terdi li'u
.i cusku fa la cevni lu ju'i do'u mi dunda fi do fe piro loi srasu noi se
tsiju loi tsiju zi'enoi se stuzi lo sefta be piro loi terdi ku'o .e piro
loi tricu poi stuzi loi tricu grute
.i se ponse .e'o do mu'i lenu do citka .e'a do'a
.i go'i lu'a piro loi terdi jmive .e piro loi tsani cipni .e piro loi
befydzu be le terdi lu'u noi ke'a ponse lo jmive pruxi ku'o mu'i lenu citka
.e'a do'a li'u
.i zasti
.i zgana fa la cevni roda poi ri zbasu ku'o fi'o se jinvi loza'i mutce
xamgu
.i vanci .i cerni .i xamoi djedi

ni'oni'o
mulno fa le tsani .ebo le terdi .e piro loi jenmi girzu pe ri
.i mulri'a fa la cevni ca le zemoi djedi levo'a se gunka (?) noi vo'a zbasu
.i cadysti fa la cevni ca le zemoi djedi piro leivo'a se gunka noi vo'a zbasu
.i cesto'edapma (/?!/) fa la cevni le zemoi djedi gi'e cesri'a ri ki'u lenu
ca ri cadysti piro lei se gunka poi la cevni cu finti je zbasu


----------------
Starting with Day 5


ni'o
bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o ferti fa lei djacu loi so'imei danlu
noi jmive .e loi cipni poi voirli'u ga'u lei terdi tu'i le tsani sligu
li'u
(new) uttered "god" "(command!) be-fertile the-mass-of water [producing]
the-mass-of many-ish animals which-inc. live, and the-mass-of birds
which-restrictively flyingly-travel above the-mass-of earth,
assoc-with-site the sky-solid"
Note the VSO order.  That's what it is.  I think I'm a little inconsistent
with my le/lei/loi here.  Note, though, that "animals" and "birds" here are
singular in the Hebrew, thus massified.

.i finti fa la cevni lei barda xasydanlu .e piro loi jmive poi
befydzu zi'epoi se ferti lei djacu (ku'o) zi'e ne ja'i lora jutsi ge'u
.e piro loi se nalci cipni ne ja'i lori jutsi
Created "god" the-mass-of big-thing sea-animals and all-of the-mass-of
living-things which-rest. belly-walk and-which-rest.
are-the-result-of-the-fertility-of the-mass-of water and-inc.-assoc-with

.i zasti
Existing-thing
My "and it was so".

.i zbasu fa la cevni loi terdi jmive ne ja'i lori jutsi ge'u .e loi danlu
ne ja'i lori jutsi ge'u .e loi dertu befydzu ne ja'i lori jutsi
And made "god" mass-of earth-livers inc-assoc with-rule the last's species,
and mass-of animals inc-assoc with-rule the last's species, and mass-of
soil bellywalkers inc-assoc with-rule the last's species.
Here, as above, the nouns are massified singulars, so we really are seeing
"Mr. Beast" here (or more accurately "Ms. Beast", since "beast" is
feminine).

.i zgana fa la cevni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
Observes "god" with-opinion state-of good.

.i bacru fa la cevni lu .ai mi zbasu loi remna ne ta'i le
se tarmi be mi
Utters "god" "(intent!) I/we make mass-of humanity inc-assoc with-form
the shape of me/us.
Note that I have to attach the "ta'i" to "loi remna" (again, massified),
otherwise it implies that it is la cevni who has the shape, which is not
what the sentence is trying to say.  similarly in the following verses.
Note also that Lojban enables me to avoid the annoying point brought up by
many that this verse is actually in plural in the Hebrew, "Let us make Man
in our image".  I left out part of this verse, because I couldn't translate
it.  It's really something like "Let's make Man in our image according to
our likeness."  Those two points are too close for me to do them justice in
the translation.

.i ra turni ba'a.e'a loi xamsi finpe .e loi tsani cipni .e loi danlu .e
piro loi terdi .e piro loi befydzu noi befydzu loi terdi li'u
Something-recent rules (I expect!  permission!) mass-of sea fish and
mass-of sky birds and mass-of animals and all-of mass-of earth and all-of
mass-of bellywalkers which-inc bellywalk [on] mass-of earth"
I put in the "ra", implied only by the third-person-plural form of the verb
in Hebrew, because otherwise the assignment of x1 to "mi" is too
reasonable.  I didn't put in a tense, I think the UI's handle that ok, but
maybe one would go well.  The redundant bellywalking is found in the
original.

.i finti fa la cevni loi remna goi fo'a ne ta'i le tarmi be vo'a
Invents "god" mass-of humans (=x6) inc-assoc with-form the-shape of
x1("god")
I decided to assign a KOhA because I use them a lot in the next two verses.
Well, twice anyway, and that seems enough, especially since I wouldn't feel
right restating the sumti and would resort to "ri/ra" or something.  I use
"fo'a" because this is of minor importance and temporary and I expect that
"ko'a" will be more useful for more permanent things.  I imagine any Bible
would keep God as "ko'a" most of the time.  Finally remembered the
existence of "vo'a", thankfully.  I am fond of using afterthought
possessives (as oppoed to"le vo'a tarmi"), especially here where it's
actually a place, and because in Hebrew the possessive is a declension
affecting chiefly the end of the word also, or else another word
afterwards.  Besides, you can be so much more specific with "po/po'e/pe" if
you use afterthought.  Note also that I had to attach the "ta'i" to "loi
remna" otherwise you get "'god' is-a-creator...with-form...", which again
isn't what we want.  Is there a better way to do this?

.i seri'a loza'i se tarmi le tarmi be la cevni cu finti fo'a (???)
With-result state-of: being-shaped-like the-shape-of "god", [something]
invents x6
Another way of indicating "In the image of God [he] created him".  The
ellipsis is in the original and quite natural to my ear.

.i seri'a loza'i nakni ce fetsi cu finti fo'a (???)
With-result state-of: being-male unordered-set-with being-female
[something] invents x6
Similar structure.  "fo'a" hides the change from singular-masculine pronoun
in last verse to plural pronoun in this one.  Is this an okay rendering of
"male and female [he] created them"?

.i cesto'edapma(???!!) fo'a fa la cevni
Holy-opposite-of-curses x6 "god"
Again, that annoying "cesto'edapma"

.ije cusku fi fo'a fa la cevni fe lu ko seljbe je so'imei gi'e se culno loi
terdi gi'e jinga ri
And expresses [to] x6 "god" "you! give-birth-and-be-many and be-filler-of
mass-of earth and conquer the-last
Again, inconsistent with my "loi terdi", I think.

.i ko turni loi xamsi finpe .e loi tsani cipni .e piro loi danlu poi
befydzu loi terdi li'u
You! rule mass-of sea fish and mass-of sky birds and all-of mass-of animals
which-rest. bellywalk [on] mass-of earth."

.i cusku fa la cevni lu ju'i do'u mi dunda fi do fe piro loi srasu noi se
tsiju loi tsiju zi'enoi se stuzi lo sefta be piro loi terdi ku'o .e piro
loi tricu poi stuzi loi tricu grute
Expresses "god" "attention!  I give to you all-of mass-of grass which-inc
is-beseeded-by mass-of seeds and-which-inc. has-site the surface of all-of
mass-of earth (close-rel), and all-of mass-of trees which-rest.
are-sites-of tree-fruit
Use "ju'i do'u" for "hinei", something like "Behold!" (basically I view this
as "Yo!")  Should the last "poi" be a "noi"?  probably not, but I suspect I
have a few errors with that here and there in this translation.

.i se ponse .e'o do mu'i lenu do citka .e'a do'a
[Something] belongs-to (command!) you, motivated-by the-event: you eat
(permission! generosity!)
Deviated a little from the structure of the original for smoother Lojban,
but not much.  Sentence break is a little weird, but I think it's better
this way.

.i go'i lu'a piro loi terdi jmive .e piro loi tsani cipni .e piro loi
befydzu be le terdi lu'u noi ke'a ponse lo jmive pruxi ku'o mu'i lenu citka
.e'a do'a li'u
Ditto the-members-of: all-of (mass-of earth-livers and all-of mass-of sky
birds and all-of mass-of bellywalkers-on-the-earth)
which-inc.-are-such-that they(the members above) possess a living-thing
spirit, (close-rel) motivated-by the-event: eaters (permission!
generosity!)"
The verb is absent here, so I think "go'i" works well.  I wanted the
relative clause, stated only once, to apply to all the critters named, so I
had to find a way to sort of group all of them together.  I think the
lu'a/lu'u is right, tho maybe something else for "lu'a"?

.i zasti
Existing-thing

.i zgana fa la cevni roda poi ri zbasu ku'o fi'o se jinvi loza'i mutce
xamgu
Observes "god" all-x1 which the-last makes (close-rel) with-opinion
state-of: muchly good
Expanded version of my usual.  I probably could have just done "ro se
zbasu", but felt like being more expansive.  I believe "da" is not
anaphorable, so "ri" has to refer to "la cevni".

.i vanci .i cerni .i xamoi djedi
Evening.  Morning.  Sixth day.
The Hebrew has a definite article on the name of the day, something that's
not there for the others, but I couldn't figure out how to put it there (or
even what it means), so left it out.

ni'oni'o
mulno fa le tsani .ebo le terdi .e piro loi jenmi girzu pe ri
(newnew) complete the sky-and-the earth and all-of mass-of army group
restric.-assoc-with the-last
Kinda dippy for "their hosts" or whatever, but the best I could come up
with.  I use ".ebo" to stick "le tsani" and "le terdi" together tighter
than the next sumti, in the hopes that maybe "ri" could refer to both of
them together.  Maybe forget that and use "rajoiri" instead?

.i mulri'a fa la cevni ca le zemoi djedi levo'a se gunka (?) noi vo'a zbasu
Complete-makes "god" during the seventh day x1's("god"'s) thing-worked-on
which-inc. x1("god") makes
Again remembered "vo'a".  Is it okay to use it inside a "noi" clause to
refer to the x1 outside, or does that have to be flagged?  "gunka" is
likely the wrong gismu; doesn't fit the meaning well.  Or maybe it does.
The old "-ri'a" semi-dikyjvo formation comes in handy.

.i cadysti fa la cevni ca le zemoi djedi piro leivo'a se gunka noi vo'a
zbasu
Idly-ceases "god" during the seventh day all-of mass-of x1's
thing-worked-on which-inc x1 makes.
Used "cadysti" for the verb which implies cessation and sort of rest.  It's
okay; maybe a tanru would be nicer.  Why do I massify here?  not sure.  Can
you "sisti le se gunka", or do you really need a "lenu gunka" or something
(or tu'a le se gunka...)?

.i cesto'edapma (/?!/) fa la cevni le zemoi djedi gi'e cesri'a ri ki'u lenu
ca ri cadysti piro lei se gunka poi la cevni cu finti je zbasu
Holy-opposite-of-curses "god" the seventh day and holy-makes the-last
justified-by the-event: during the-last idly-ceases all-of the-mass-of
that-worked-on which-rest. "god" invents-and-makes.
Again that "blesses" lujvo.  Should that be "poi" or "noi"?  Is it okay to
use "ri'a" in "cesria", or do I need a different causative?

Well, I think I've rambled way plenty for now.  More on this if/when I ever
get a chance.

~mark
      o o     o   o             o o   o     o        o   o     o o
              o                       o o   o      o       o     o
  o   o     o     o         o     o     o   o      o     o     o     N2KOT
Mark E. Shoulson:  shoulson@ctr.columbia.edu

From cbmvax!uunet!CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!shoulson@powerstrip.ai.cs.yale.edu  Ukn Jan 27 16:21:29 1992
Return-Path: 
Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19)
	id ; Mon, 27 Jan 92 16:21 EST
Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91)
	id AA13518; Mon, 27 Jan 92 11:47:11 EST
Received: from cunixf.cc.columbia.edu by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA03563; Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:47:08 -0500
Received: from cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu by cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (5.59/FCB)
	id AA15839; Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:47:04 EST
Message-Id: <9201271547.AA15839@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1) with BSMTP id 4496; Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:45:42 EST
Received: by CUVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 8639; Mon, 27 Jan 92 10:45:02 EST
Date:         Mon, 27 Jan 1992 10:43:33 EST
Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" 
Sender: Lojban list 
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" 
Subject:      Genesis
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan ,
        Eric Raymond ,
        Eric Tiedemann 
In-Reply-To:  nsn%MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu's message of Sun,
              26 Jan 1992 21:12:54 +1100
Status: RO
X-Status:

>Date:         Sun, 26 Jan 1992 21:12:54 +1100
>From: nsn%MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu

>I was able to read the first few days of the thing without a vocab next to
>me, which made me feel great. The VSO is usually not handled clumsily, and
>sounds pleasant. Great work, sir. Comments:

Thanks a lot, Nick.  Compliments always go far with me.  I also found I
could proofread it directly, and I sorta like VSO (tho I used it 'cause the
original is [I know that's bad translating style]).

>>.i zgana fa la cevni le gusni fi'o se jinvi loza'i xamgu
>I would go for {ci'o} rather than {fi'o se jinvi}. Well, I would!

I assume you mean {seci'o}.  I'm not sure like it.  It's certainly Zipfier,
but the meaning is wrong.  "seci'o loza'i xamgu" feels more like God feels
good about himself or something.  I think "fi'o se jinvi" has just the
right meaning, it's just unfortunate I had to use "fi'o".  I'm not closed
about this, though...

>>.i fedri'a fa la cevni fo le gusni ku ce le manku (ku)
>Well, given that fedri'a should have the x1 of rinka, that x1 should be
>uncleft: tu'a la cevni. Do we leave it as is? Actually, I have a nasty
>proposal of building a {fai} place into all -ri'a to take care of things
>(la cevni cu fedri'a fai tu'a la cevni), but that's just me.

Urk.  Yeah, there oughta be a "tu'a" or "gau".  I think I had one before
and lost it when I flipped to VSO.

>>.i cesto'edapma(?!?) ra fa la cevni secu'u lu ko seljbe je
>>so'imei gi'e se culno lei djacu pe ne'i lei xamsi
>I'd use something based on {zanru} for "bless". I really don't like {secu'u},
>it is so obviously swallowing up another predicate (cusku). What about
>approve-tell x2 to x3? Unfortunately there is no "tell" in lojban, just
>talk about, discuss, utter, and the closest possible, {notci} - message.
>crunoi?

Hmmm.  zanru.  That has promise.  Funny, I was rather pleased with the
"secu'u", it seemed to be just what BAI words are for: sticking in a
"thing-said" place in a predicate that wouldn't otherwise have one.

>>ni'o
>>bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o krasi fa le terdi loi jmive ne ja'i lori
>>jutsi zi'e no'u loi danlu ku joi loi befydzu ku joi loi terdi jmive
>>ne ja'i lori jutsi li'u
>Do you want to put in "domesticated" before "animal"? What would it be?
>to'e cilce? remzda?

I dunno if I'd want to put it in explicitly, and I also can't think of a
great tanru/lujvo for it.  Maybe something with "cange"?

>>.i ra turni ba'a.e'a loi xamsi finpe .e loi tsani cipni .e loi danlu .e
>>piro loi terdi .e piro loi befydzu noi befydzu loi terdi li'u
>{ba'a} is tense enough. Well, tense-equivalent.

Is this good or bad?  It *has* to be future, since "loi remna" hasn't been
created yet.  I figured with the "ba'a" I wouldn't need to touch the tenses
or anything, and still get a feeling of future.

>>Note also that I had to attach the "ta'i" to "loi
>>remna" otherwise you get "'god' is-a-creator...with-form...", which again
>>isn't what we want.  Is there a better way to do this?
>I don't know of one, and it's turning out to be uncomfortable (the Esp
>accusative is SOOOO much more convenient :)

Yeah, it's kinda messy.  This way isn't *so* horrid, but I have my doubts.

>>.i seri'a loza'i nakni ce fetsi cu finti fo'a (???)
>I'd say {jo'u} for {ce}, just to make sure. Or maybe {fa'u}? {ce} is not quite
>free of the connotations {joi} would bring - androgyny. Yes, {ce} isn't {joi},
>and sets aren't mixed, but just to be sure, make it {fa'u}

I'm also halting between "seri'a" as above and "tezu'e" for the sumti
tcita.  I thought "ce" was just about right, but maybe "jo'u".  Those
non-logicals are so tricky.  "fa'u" is legit, but if you want to go that
route there's also "ce'o".

>>.i cusku fa la cevni lu ju'i do'u mi dunda fi do fe piro loi srasu noi se
>As an aside, I'm starting to get used to {fi..fe..} to render our swallowed-up
>NL dative.

Thanks.  I felt a little guilty about scrambling the places so cavalierly,
but we mustn't be too afraid to use FA.

Received: from cbmvax.UUCP by rutgers.edu (5.59/SMI4.0/RU1.4/3.08) with UUCP
	id AA10988; Mon, 27 Jan 92 17:21:10 EST
Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91)
	id AA06927; Mon, 27 Jan 92 17:00:30 EST
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (via uunet.UU.NET) by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA13132; Mon, 27 Jan 92 16:50:03 -0500
Message-Id: <9201272150.AA13132@relay2.UU.NET>
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1) with BSMTP id 5289; Mon, 27 Jan 92 16:48:28 EST
Received: by CUVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 1359; Mon, 27 Jan 92 16:47:41 EST
Date:         Mon, 27 Jan 1992 16:46:19 TZONE
Reply-To: David Cortesi 
Sender: Lojban list 
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
              cortesi@CRICKHOLLOW.INFORMIX.COM
From: David Cortesi 
Subject:      numeral strings
X-To:         lojban mailing list 
To: John Cowan 
Status: RO

I cast a vote opposing implicit multiplication in numeral
strings.  I go for repai = 2*10 + 3.14159...

The interpretation should be same as reso'i which I assume
means 2*10 + many, that is, something between 25 and 29.

(There is a way to switch radix, yes? so that with the
appropriate previx (bi ju'u?), repai would mean 2*8 + pi, etc)

On the side issue of notation for complex numbers, I dislike
the idea of implicit multiplication by ka'o just as much as
the implicit multiplication by pai.

Ivan suggests writing ka'o as a prefix, but unless its meaning
also changes, that only introduces confusion as to what
it is multiplied against.  What is needed is a cmavo that delimits
the "real" from the "imaginary" part of a two-dimensional number,
the role of the comma in (3,4) as a point in the plane.  Is it
not correct that this interpretation of a complex number is more
general than the interpretation of 3+4i?  If it was convenient to
speak two-dimensioned numbers as syntactic tuples, there would
not be any desire to make a special case of ka'o.

Such a "comma" word should bind tightly (be a short-scope grouper
like bo) so that parentheses would not be needed to speak a
complex literal as a sumti.  Perhaps this mechanism already
exists...?

From cbmvax!uunet!CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!shoulson@powerstrip.ai.cs.yale.edu  Ukn Jan 29 13:32:30 1992
Return-Path: 
Received: by snark.thyrsus.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.19)
	id ; Wed, 29 Jan 92 13:32 EST
Received: by cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (5.57/UUCP-Project/Commodore 2/8/91)
	id AA03245; Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:46:30 EST
Received: from cunixf.cc.columbia.edu by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA17680; Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:05:57 -0500
Received: from cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu by cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (5.59/FCB)
	id AA24555; Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:06:00 EST
Message-Id: <9201291606.AA24555@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.1) with BSMTP id 8608; Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:03:08 EST
Received: by CUVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 1575; Wed, 29 Jan 92 11:02:50 EST
Date:         Wed, 29 Jan 1992 11:01:09 EST
Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" 
Sender: Lojban list 
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" 
Subject:      Genesis 1:1 - 2:3
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan ,
        Eric Raymond ,
        Eric Tiedemann 
In-Reply-To:  CJ FINE's message of Tue, 28 Jan 1992 11:31:26 GMT
Status: RO
X-Status:

>Date:         Tue, 28 Jan 1992 11:31:26 GMT
>From: CJ FINE 

>> .i bacru fa la cevni lu .e'o ferti fa le terdi loi srasu je spati noi

>Surely this is "srasu joi spati" (or perhaps "jo'u") - as it is, it is
>the mass of things which are both grass and plants which incidentally
>...

Actually, the {je} was intentional.  The Hebrew phrase is "tadshe ha'aretz
deshe, `esev...", which goes something like "let the earth be grassed with
grass, herb(sing, massified)...."  "`esev" and "deshe" are near synonyms for
grass, with the former having more an implication of the individual blades
and the latter implying more of "lawn".  The lack of a conjunction in the
Hebrew could be viewd as asyndeton (leaving out a conjunction), and maybe
it is, but I decided to go for more of a parallel view, things which are
grass-and-plants.  Hmmm.  I'd still get something of that meaning with
{joi}, since it'd be a tanru connector...  I have to ponder this.

>> .i finti fa la cevni lei barda xasydanlu .e piro loi jmive poi
>> befydzu zi'epoi se ferti lei djacu (ku'o) zi'e ne ja'i lora jutsi ge'u
>Do you mean "befydzu" here? The RSV just has "moves" - haven't checked
>the Hebrew. Reading it cold, it says "all the living things that both crawl
>and are brought forth from the waters", which seemed odd to me.

The Hebrew has "all the living spirit(s) that creep..."  (eep, forgot the
"spirit".  See what I mean?  An experienced translator wouldn't worry about
something like that, only a nutty greenhorn like me).  Actually, I can't be
authoritative on that verb.  It's the same one that I translated as
"befydzu" later on, where it's more obvious.  As to the odd redundancy of
the verse, that's not my fault:  "God created the great sea-creatures, and
all the creeping living spirit[s] that swarm the waters..."  The last
clause is difficult in the original.  I translated the "swarming" verb as
"ferti" because it implies the fertility of growth and stuff, more so than
just "brought forth".


>> .i go'i lu'a piro loi terdi jmive .e piro loi tsani cipni .e piro loi
>> befydzu be le terdi lu'u noi ke'a ponse lo jmive pruxi ku'o mu'i lenu citka
>> .e'a do'a li'u
>It seems to me that if you are going to use lu'a, you should give it a
>set to work on, or at least use alternation. I would read what you wrote
>as individuals that are earth-living AND sky-birds AND creeping on the
>earth. "ce" or "a".

Hmmmm.  This {lu'a} thingy is not something I'm very familiar with.  But
your reading implies that the {.e}s are getting interpreted like {je}s in a
tanru or something.  Is this what {lu'a} does?  I don't like {.a}, but
maybe {ce}.

>> mulno fa le tsani .ebo le terdi .e piro loi jenmi girzu pe ri
>I wondered about "ebo" - it looked as if you were trying to group, which
>is significant syntactically but not, I think, semantically, since "e"
>is associative. Having read your note about "ri" I see what you were
>trying to do, but I'm dubious whether it works.

>I'm very dubious about "jenmi girzu" - I only know the word "tz'va'ot"
>in this context, so it could be that your translation is accurate, but I
>would much prefer to translate it as "so'irmei" or "(so'ir)xabju".

I'm also dubious, about both.  "Tz'va`ot" means something like "hosts", but
the fact is that {jenmi girzu} is almost certainly a very bad rendering.  I
assume you mean {so'imei} and not {so'irmei}, since the latter would be
"many-measure", and not "multitude".  {[so'ir]xabju} sounds really nice,
though.

>> . . .  I am fond of using afterthought
>> possessives (as oppoed to"le vo'a tarmi"), especially here where it's
>> actually a place, and because in Hebrew the possessive is a declension
>> affecting chiefly the end of the word also, or else another word
>> afterwards.  Besides, you can be so much more specific with "po/po'e/pe" if
>> you use afterthought.  Note also that I had to attach the "ta'i" to "loi
>> remna" otherwise you get "'god' is-a-creator...with-form...", which again
>> isn't what we want.  Is there a better way to do this?
>I agree about the afterthought possessive, particularly here.
>Another way to do the "ta'i" is
>   .i tarmi be vo'a finti fa la cevni loi remna

>I can't see a way to get the word order as the original though - "co"
>won't do, because he is a "finti" not a "tarmi".

Hmm.  Using a tanru.  That's pretty good, but I'm always a little nervous
about complex tanru.  Besides, it runs into the same problem:  your tanru
is prone to being interpreted as "God is a shape-of-God-creator of
humanity", thus "God is-a-shape-of-God and a-creator...", by parallel
lujvo.  Then again, my next few verses (with {seri'a}, or maybe {tezu'e})
have a similar ambiguity (with the result that *who* has God's shape?), and
actually even the original has it a bit (though nobody notices).

>> .i seri'a loza'i se tarmi le tarmi be la cevni cu finti fo'a (???)
>I would definitely prefer a "kei" before (or instead of) "cu" - this
>was about the hardest line in the whole passage to make sense of - in
>fact, first I thought the whole sentence was a tagged sumti, then I missed
>the fact that everything up to the "cu" was governed by the tag, and
>thought "le tarmi" was the x1. What you've written is grammatical, but
>it confused me.

Yeah, I can see where a {kei} would be nice there.  But the {cu} still
wouldn't be elidable; otherwise the nu/kei phrase would become part of a
tanru with {finti}.

>> Again remembered "vo'a".  Is it okay to use it inside a "noi" clause to
>> refer to the x1 outside, or does that have to be flagged?
>Seems right to me.

Maybe, but less so to me, now.  Ditto the "neja'i lori jutsi" construction.
I think we do need an "outer-utterance" pro-sumti.

>> .i cesto'edapma (/?!/) fa la cevni le zemoi djedi gi'e cesri'a ri ki'u lenu
>> ca ri cadysti piro lei se gunka poi la cevni cu finti je zbasu
>> Holy-opposite-of-curses "god" the seventh day and holy-makes the-last
>> justified-by the-event: during the-last idly-ceases all-of the-mass-of
>> that-worked-on which-rest. "god" invents-and-makes.
>> Again that "blesses" lujvo.  Should that be "poi" or "noi"?  Is it okay to
>> use "ri'a" in "cesria", or do I need a different causative?

>How about "cesygalfi" (don't know the rafsi offhand)?

The only shorter form is {cesyga'i}, which is hardly better.  The meaning,
however, is very good.  Better than {cesri'a}.  Maybe I'll change it.

>          Kolin

~mark (shoulson@ctr.columbia.edu)