1<NORMAL.STYHP3@5 ni'oni'o vanci .icabo nalcladu ne'i le ckafybarja .i lebi'u remna cu klama mo'ine'i ra .i ko'a goi ra zutse ne'a lo jubme .i ko'a cpedu loi tcati le kafybarja se jibri .i ba so'o mentu ko'a se dunda loi tcati gi'e co'aru'inai pinxe ri ni'o ko'a ca lenu ko'a pinxe loi tcati po ko'a cu zgana lenu lebi'u nanmu cu se dunda lei ckafi poi ra pu cpedu ke'a .ije le nanmu goi ko'e cu pencu le kabri poi se nenri lei ckafi ku'o le degji gi'enai pinxe lei ckafi .ije mu'i zo'epela'edi'u ko'e cusku lu .o'onai ju'i do'u ko lebna lei vi ckafi gi'ebabo bevri fi mi fe lei je'a glare ku'i ckafi li'u le bevri be lei ckafi be'o goi ko'i .i ko'i cusku lu .u'u .ie ga'inai li'u gi'ebabo lebna le kabri .i ko'i krefu klama gi'e bevri lei ckafi vau ba so'o mentu .i ko'e krefu pencu le kabri .i ko'e cusku lu .i'esai ba'e ti ku'i cu je'a glare ckafi li'u .i ko'e gleki pinxe lei ckafi po ko'e no'i ko'a zgana la'eso'odi'u .i ba so'o mentu ko'a tavla le bi'unai selpinxe bevri goi ko'i .i ko'a cusku lu .ia do pu bevri lei naldrata ckafi ta vau xu li'u .i ko'i cusku lu go'i .o'unairo'a .u'uro'a li'u .i ko'a cusku lu ko .i'i na jikca dunku .i mi puzuze'u se jibri loinu bevri loi selpinxe vi lo gusta .iseki'ubo mi djuno tu'a le do se zukte .i da poi prenu cu genai pinxe lei ckafi gi pencu le kabri gi'e na'e djica tu'a lei ckafi ki'u loza'i na'e pe'ise'inai glare .ije semu'i loinu da minde mi lenu basti lei ckafi loi glare ckafi kei kei mi lebna lei ckafi gi'e na'o denpa fu'i so'e mentu tezu'e lenu tu'a lei ckafi cu glaryri'a le kabri kei fo lenu krefu dunda lei naldrata ckafi .i za'a do panra zukte .i la'ede'u ve ctuca fu tu'a le slabu lisri be le bebna seljibri ka'u li'u .i ko'i cusku lu le lisri ki'a li'u .i ko'a cusku lu .ue do punaixu ve lisri fu ri li'u .i lu noroi ve lisri li'u .i lu .ai mi te lisri .i tu'e ka'u da'i puzuki da te bende le re seljibri .i fo'a goi le te bende ca le fanmo be le jeftu cu pleji le se jerna le re seljibri no'u lu'i le prije seljibri goi fo'e ge'u jo'u le bebna seljibri goi fo'i .i le se jerna cu rupnu li panono .ijesemu'ibo fo'a pleji lei jdini beta'i le pelji jdini fo'e .e fo'i .i fo'e ckire fo'a gi'ebabo cliva gi'e gleki ki'u lenu le jdini cu se vamji li su'orau .i fo'i na'e gleki .i cusku lu .o'onai mi to'e lazni gunka fi'o te bende do ca piro le jeftu .i do pleji levi malpelji .i'enaisai mi .i le'o ko pleji fi mi fe le je'u je'a jdini no'u lo sicni li'u .isemu'ibo fo'a pleji fo'i lo gusminra sicni poi se fepni li mu .iseki'ubo fo'i gleki klama lefo'i zdani tu'u .i tu'a di'u xe ctuca fi ledu'u jdice nagi'apubo e'ucai zgana .i .ua ri'a je'unai ka'u le sego'i zo "za'a" noi cmavo fi lesi'o zgana ku'o cu rafsi zo zabna li'u Mark's translation uses Lojban pronouns to preserve the gender-free qualities of his Lojban: It was quiet in the coffeehouse one evening, and a person (ko'a) came in. ko'a sat at a table and ordered tea from the cafe employee. After a few minutes, ko'a was given some tea and began sipping intermittently at it. As ko'a was sitting drinking ko'a's tea, ko'a saw a man being given the coffee which he'd ordered. The man touched the cup that contained the coffee, but didn't drink the coffee. So he said, "Hey! Take this coffee back and bring me some hot coffee!" to the waiter (ko'i). "Yes sir, sorry..." And ko'i took the cup away. A few minutes later, ko'i returned carrying the cup. He (the man) touched the cup again, and said "Ah! Now that's some hot coffee!" and happily drank his coffee. ko'a had seen all this happen, and several minutes later was talking to the waiter. ko'a said, "You brought that guy the same coffee, didn't you?" "Um... yeah, I did..." "Don't worry. I used to work as a waiter in a restaurant, so I know what you did. There are people who don't drink the coffee, they just touch the cup and don't want the coffee because they think it's not hot enough. So when they tell me to get them some fresh coffee, I just take the coffee and wait a few minutes until the coffee warms the cup and bring them the same coffee back again. And I see you've done the same. That's really the moral of the old story about the foolish laborer." "What story?" "You never heard it?" "Never." "OK, I'll tell it then. Once upon a time, there was a manager (fo'a) with two workers. At the end of the week, he paid his two workers: the wise worker (fo'e) and the foolish worker (fo'i). Their salary was $100, so he paid them with paper money. fo'e thanked fo'a and left, happy because he was paid so well. "fo'i wasn't happy. "Look! I worked hard for you all week, and now you're paying me with this dumb piece of paper!? You better pay me with some real money, with coins!" So fo'a paid fo'i with shiny coins, worth 5 cents, and fo'i went happily home. "This all teaches that you have to look closely before passing judgement. In fact, that's why "za'a", which represents the idea of observation, is also an affix for "zabna"/favourable." Lojbab: This text uses "bi'u" and "bi'unai" which are not on any published word lists yet with the current meaning. They are used to discursively to mark pieces of the sentence as 'new information' or 'old information'. New information is that which the speaker is trying to communicate to the listener, while old information is that which the speaker assumes that the listener knows from background or context. Normally this distinction is conveyed in natural languages through word order (putting new information either at the beginning or the end of the sentence, typically, depending on the language and the situation), but people want to have the option in Lojban of using word order for other purposes including simply expressing the place structures in numerical order. Marking a "le" description sumti as new information on its first occurance in text, for example, means that the speaker has a specific and definite someone/something in mind, but that he doesn't expect the listener to know which someone/something is being referred to at that point. Without "bi'u", the listener might wonder why he can't figure out which one the speaker is talking about. Lojbab: I'm wondering why Mark waited till this sentence to assign ko'a. It makes things unnecessarily more difficult on the reader to have done so, since he ends up with two "ra"s with different values only a few words apart. I don't frown on this so much with "ri" which is fairly strictly confined to the next previous sumti, but "ra" is loosely enough defined that one has to stop and think about whether it might or might not mean the same as the previous usage. Since he is dealing with a 3rd person narration section of a story, assigning with "le ... remna goi ko'a" in the previous sentence isonly fair. Nick: zo'epela'edi'u is more accurate here than ".isemu'ibo", but it's still a mouthful. I'm not confident about the usage of "ku'i". Mark: I thought ".isemu'ibo" wasn't quite right, since after all, it wasn't his touching the cup, but rather what he felt that made him refuse. I'm glad you saw that too. "zo'epela'edi'u" is a bit much to say, but not impossible. Note my "zo'epe" metonymizer. I was actually proud of the "ku'i" there. "Bring me some hot coffee (as opposed to this tepid stuff)." Lojbab: How about "tu'ala'edi'u"? Colin: Can anybody explain "no'i" to me, please? Mark: Not me. I don't know what it is either. I threw it in because I've pretty much never seen it before and figured it deserved some exposure, and this seemed like a possible usage. I'm going back to "ko'a", so it's sort of an old topic... isn't it? Lojbab: The purpose is to allow you to change topics ("ni'o"), and possibly even contexts, but then to resume the old context at will with "no'i" ("ni'o" and "no'i" can be subscripted, I believe, if you are dealing with many contexts). Context is typically defined in terms of a certain space-time tense reference and possibly a set of anaphora assignments. Major intended uses are for a story-within-a-story (for which the concept was invented - I've been working on an Arabian Nights translation for a few years now, and that collection nests stories several levels deep, as charcters in a story tell a story with characters who in turn tell stories, etc., continually popping from level to level with stories stopping, starting, and being interrupted for metalinguistic comment or action at a higher story level), for comparison between two situations, and a whole bunch of oddball things that happen in stylistics of longer narratives. The conventions of switching anaphora assignments (i.e. the definition of ko'a, ko'e, da, de, etc.) or tense reference (the value assigned with "ki" are not well established because "no'i" has not been used much used. Other applications are certainly possible, and will have to be developed through usage. Hopefully they will be generally consistent with the originally intended purposes. Mark: I don't like the way "di'u" only means "the last utterance". It's bringing number considerations into Lojban where it never had them before. I'd have expected it to mean "the last utterance(s)", with optional number, like everything else. You can't always use tu'e/tu'u, sometimes it's used in afterthought. I had to use that hideous "la'e joigi di'ugide'u" [in the original draft of this story], counting on "de'u" to be non-number-specific. Had to use forethought because otherwise "la'e" would stick only to "di'u" and not the whole thing. Iain: In the latest version of the grammar, LAhE apply to a whole sumti, with an explicit optional LUhU terminator, so you could use afterthought. Why not "[le] re di'u" - the previous two utterances, "so'o de'u" - several recent utterances, etc. [Mark liked this approach and incorporated it in the printed version.] Lojbab: I ask you: What is an 'utterance'? In Lojban, an utterance can be more than a single sentence, a paragraph even, or whatever. I would think this would be familiar to net people from Cowan's method of net quotation on Lojban-List: "la lojbab. cusku di'e", where "di'e" is the forward counting utterance equivalent of the back-counting "di'u". Thus, the 'utterance' to which "di'u" refers is not that well defined, and may indeed refer to multiple sentences. Grammatically, the construct labelled 'utterance' is a single sentence or partial sentence. However, it has generally been agreed, for example, that ".ije" joining, or ".ibo" joining gives a logical unit (as does ".itu'e ...tu'u", as you noted). Thus the concept utterance extends to be what is labelled an "utterance-string" in the grammar, or perhaps even to the construct labelled "text-B", which can include multiple paragraphs. Now the usage default convention of 'utterance' has tended to be a single sentence, but it need not always be so. If context suggests a longer utterance is intended, fine. A possibility to consider when you are dealing with a range of sentences and don't want to count, would be to use di'upezi/di'upeza/di'upezu to indicate relative length of referenced utterance. Mark: I also replaced a lot of "lenu"'s with "loinu"'s, though this is not common practice. I did this because of the article by JCB that was posted here not long ago, in which he pointed out that a lot of our "lenu"'s are really massified: you're not waiting for a specific even of a cab's arriving, you're waiting for a manifestation of the mass of such events. I thought JCB had a very good point there. [Lojbab: I would love to print JCB's essay on massification that appeared on the computer nets, but am quite sure that he would not give permission given the continuing antagonism he apparently feels towards LLG and me.] Colin: I don't think you can use "pe'ise'inai" in the way that I think you are trying to. It reads "didn't want to drink the coffee because it was not (I think but it's not my issue) hot." It seemed to me that you were trying to make it "... it was not (in their opinion) hot", which you cannot do with attitudinals. Mark: I'm not so sure about this. I'm not 100% positive about what "se'i"/"se'inai" do. Somewhere in the past someone said they could be used in this way, to tag attitudinals explicitly as belonging to the speaker or not. Oh, I remember. It was when Nick and I were discussing whether attitudinals on "du'u" in the x2 of "djuno" applied to the speaker or to the x1. Actually, we were discussing it with reference to "kau" then, but this was when "kau" was still evolving. Lojbab said you could use "kause'i" and "kause'inai" to distinguish who was "knowing" (remember, at the time we were considering "kau" as mostly just "known!"), since "se'i" always made things apply to the speaker. I fear you're probably right anyway, but I hope you're wrong, since your second reading, the one I intended, is such an elegant way to say it.... [Later ...] I didn't change ..., e.g. Colin's objection to "pe'ise'inai" for "in their opinion", since last I heard the jury's still out on what it should mean, and I like the way it sounds. Lojbab: Mark's usage is fairly consistent with what we had in mind for "se'inai", but is vague as to who actually holds the opinion other than the narrator. Lojban intentionally makes specifically attributing emotions to others difficult (as do many natural languages), and I would prefer such comments to be metalinguistic discursives using "sei". In this case, "sei da jinvi", or "sei vo'a jinvi", or even probably "sei jinvi" says the same thing, but makes the attribution of opinion a claim rather than an empathic understanding/attribution of emotion (which is what I see as the proper meaning of "se'inai" modifying an attitudinal). Mark: I had trouble getting across the meanings of "this is illustrated by the old story" and "the moral of this is..." Places of "ctuca" have done the job, and reasonably well, but maybe not very well. General Comments: Mark: I could use some better use of UIs, I think. My grammar gets very complex sometimes. Nick: Hm, this one is... sober. That's ok, though. We were about due for sober :) The grammatical complexity (and I presume the same is the case for my work) means that you have to read the piece slowly, but that's not impossible. Colin: Your grammar is not complex compared to some of us ... - but you let it get quite embedded, which is a little hard to read; but it's good that we are seeing a variety of different styles. Keep it up. Some of your UI's are very good, and others I disagree with. Lojbab: Of the writings generated so far for this project, Mark's has by far the lowest density of lujvo, and he is sparing in the use of the more arcane cmavo, too. I think that simplicity of vocabulary, especially when there is no dictionary, more than makes up for a little complexity in the grammar. After all, if a sentence is a little complex, you can always bracket things more clearly by including a few optional terminators. But if you can't figure out what a couple lujvo in the sentence mean, you may be completely lost. Lojbab: On the other hand, Mark specified one gender where it doesn't seem that his story needed it: why did the person who ordered the coffee have to be a man? He could have used "prenu", or "remna". ܀ytrmjkkf d _%]&X(V)QO@@@@@@ vto9 m: h> f a _ [ Y UCC@@@@ = yA u s o m i g co ar \ Z V TCBCCCC w u q4o:jmhqdb^\XVRCCCCBCC yu=sAoJmNigca\.Z2V8TCBCCCC 8<wbufqok#i(e:c<=^VZZVaR@A@@@CCCC ahwWsYogkliqeua]XVT@@A@@A@Ayw%'us?@nGjUfsb|^Z@A@A@@@wsoBkFf{b^ZVRNJ|@A@A@A@ @@A@A vVrbnfjgea]jYnUQM+I|@A@A@A@@@@A@ @ +/w3s7o>kBg"c"_"["W"S"O"K|@A@A@A@A@A@A ""w"s"o"k"g#c #_#[#V#R#N $J|@A@@@@A@A@A@A $$w$s$o$k$g4%cI%_%[%W%S%O%K|@A@A@A@A@B@B %%w&s&n&j&f&b&^H(Z](Vg(Rk(N(J|@A@A@A@A@ @@A ((w(s(o)k)g)c)_ *[*W*S*O,K|@A@A@A@A@A@A ,,w,s,o,k",gY,cZ,^z,Z~,V,R,N.-J|@A@A@@@@A@A@A .-2-w-s-n.j.e.a/]:/Y/U/Q/M/I|@B@B@A@@@@ @@A //v]0ra0nd0jk0fJ1bN1^X1ZY1S^1Oc1K/I|A@@@A@A@A@ @ c11w1p1l1h1d1`2\2X2T)2Px2L{2HA@A@A@A@A@@@ {22w2s>3oB3j3f3b3^3Z 4V 4Qn4Mu4IA@ @@B@A@ @@A@ u4~5w5s5o5k5g5c5_5[6W6S6O6J@@@A@A@A@A@A@ 66w7s 7o 7k.7g37cw7_x7Z7VV:R[:N:J@A@B@@@A@B@B@ ::w;s;o <k <f<b<^<Z<V<R[:N:J@A@A@A@@@@A@A t< > ~ lCCCCCCA l 5@}{8:CCCCCCCCCCA :<KaGE?ECCCON < ?aaa?aAaCCCCCON < AfaGGGGCCCCCO< N  aO"a+#a#GCCCCCCCON < #&a&a&a'a 'aR'aT'a(aCCCCCCC< (+aY,G.GCCT'a(aCCCN < .0a0aa3a"4a$4aCCCCCCN < $46aw7a7GCCCCCCCB! N 77a7a7a8a8a9a9a9aCCCCCCCC< 9 <a<a<C9a9aCCCCCCCCN  >jSY#+iT.y(6 6 ;Y<Y< E~Y<  (01/06/9301/06/93Y<