[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
on 5/2/04 3:27 PM, HandyDad at lsulky@hidden.email wrote:
>
> Here's a start:
>
> ~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 1 And all the land was one language and few words.
>
> Pukul to dunya pa ten han bol kay pisi vor.
>
> 1.1: "Pukul" => [period]-all ???
What I'm thinking here is that "kul to dunya" would seem to mean all the
worlds, rather than all of one world. But I'm now thinking that it really
doesn't make any sense. I think Loglan had some kind of 'pira' construction
and that's what I was thinking of. Do we need to be sure it's one world?
And if we need to, or just want to, can we do it with han?
kul to han dunya pa ten han bol kay pisi vor.
Or, maybe I was thinking that "pukul" would mean 'whole,' or 'entire.'
Pause while I look it up. ...
Ah. Loglan dictionary has
pira - all of/110 percent of some individual or whole - a quantifier.
ra - all/eachevery member of set....
If we go with these definitions for "pukul" and "kul", it would seem to make
"tsel" unnecessary or call for it to have a different definition.
> ~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 2 And it was when [they] travelled from Qedem/the east, [they]
> found a plain in the land [of] Shin`ar and [they] dwelt there.
>
> Hi do ze jin pa voy from to duq bedo, juy jaw han pyaqter hu sta ti
> xaynarhaym kay dwelho cu.
>
> 2.1: Why end the present tense with "bedo", just after "duq"?
Here I'm using "do" as a free modifier, meaning 'when.' I decided to
'close' it with "bedo" to make it clearer, which, now that I think of it, is
a departure for the usual usage of "be." But I think it works.
> 2.2: Do we use spoken commas (viz. "...bedo, juy...")?
Optional. We can consider the commas to reflect the pause in the speech, or
we can say "koma" there.
> 2.3: Does "han" mean 'one' a strictly numerical sense, and did we
> have an indeterminate article available?
I think a mistake on my part. I think it would be an okay usage, but "ta
pyaqter" would be better.
> 2.4: I imagined that the pronunciation of 'Shin`ar' would
> yield "xinarhaym" rather than "xaynarhaym".
Probably true. I grew up among Bible belters. Make it "xinarhaym."
> 2.5: "dwelho"...when do we use "ho" and when "za" to
> connote 'commencement'?
Yikes! Damned if I know! Loglan has 'cenja' for 'become' and 'satci' for
'is the beginning.'
For obvious verbs.... dormho/za, komho/za, seems equivalent
adjectives... gaho/za, grinho/za, pretty much equivalent
nouns, now: zbanho/za kiqoho/za... Now 'become a spose' or 'become a king'
seem logical, but we seem to be missing a copula with "za" 'start being a
spouse,' 'start being a king'. But is that a problem? I somehow don't
think so. Can we have an independent word that means both 'become' and
'start'?
To diya pa ho. The day started.
To xyen pa ho kom to pan. The dog started to eat the bread.
To caylo pa ho dareno. The boy became a man? Ah. Here's what we need!
To caylo pa biho dareno. The boy started-to-be a man.
And "za"... do we need it? Maybe not. Is there anything "za" means that we
can't say with a "ho" or "fa" or some ho/fa-derived word? Esperanto has
komenci, igi and ighi.
La tago komencis. To diya pa ho bi.
Mi funkciigis la auton. Go fuqfa to tomo.
La hundo dormighis. To xyen pa dormho.
If those translations all make sense, I'm not sure we need "za" for
anything.
> ~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 3 And [one] man said to his friend, "Come! We'll brick bricks
> and burn to a burning." And the brick was to them (to) stone, and the
> clay was to them (to) material.
>
> Hi han jo pa sey ko juyde fren, "Ven! ? Gozi fu formfa ze tili kay
> fayrdurfa tuy." Hi vobay juyfuy to tili pa bi ston kay to kley pa bi
> bawxo.
>
> 3.1: The anaphor scheme takes some getting used to, I agree. But any
> anaphor scheme very different from that of English will seem odd at
> first. It gives a lot of flexibility; I say let's stick with it for
> now.
Agree. I think we'll evolve other anaphora as second resorts in some
instances.
> 3.2: Spoken quotation marks?
You betcha. It could read:
Hi han jo pa sey ko juyde fren, toy Ven! ? Gozi fu formfa ze tili kay
fayrdurfa tuy betoy. Hi vobay juyfuy to tili pa bi ston kay to kley pa bi
bawxo.
Or not, if you think your voice intonation gets the point across adequately.
> 3.3: What is the < for?
Nothing in what I see. I have an em-dash between Ven! and gozi. Maybe the
email made that into a "<"
> 3.4: If "formfa" means 'to shape', should we expect that most verbs
> will be compounds made of a primitive plus a fundamental verb
> like "fa"?
I don't know, really. But now that you bring it up, what could "form" mean
as a verbe other than 'to form or shape.' So I'd say "formfa" is okay, but
"form" will do. Same goes for "fayrdurfa". It could be just "fayrdur".
> 3.5: :-{ I cannot remember exactly what "vo" means (it marks a phrase
> boundary in a specific way, I think) and I can't find it in the
> dictionary and I can't seem to track it down in our long discussions.
> So "vobay" has me flummoxed.
Well, "vo" is used when you have a secondary verb phrase that modifies the
primary one. It's not going to be required in proleceqli, only in
loglangceqli. It works like this.
Go stu cer kom kemlan. I sit chair eat ice cream.
Now, in Mandarin, word order means that the first phrase, "stu cer" is
secondary, and by and large we can say the same is true of ceqli. However,
we can make that extra-clear.
Go vo stu cer bevo kom kemlan. Or just a bit more clear:
Go vo stu cer kom kemlan.
I eat ice cream, sitting in a chair. OTOH:
Go stu cer vo kom kemlan.
I sit in a chair, eating ice cream.
So the translation sort of means 'By them/for them/a far as they are
concerned'.
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 4 And they said, "Come! We'll build for us a city and a tower
> and its head [the tower's] in the sky, and we'll make for us a name,
> lest we be scattered on the face of all the earth."
>
> Hi to ze jin pa sey, "ciq ven! ? Gozi voben gozi fu baw han ceq, kay
> han turo. Hikay gozi fu tenho feymkyam vosam gozi be fentir ko kuljay
> vosta to dunya."
>
> 4.1: "...be fentir..." should be one word? Or does it matter?
At this point, I'd say it doesn't matter.
> ~~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 5 And YHWH descended to see the city and the tower which the
> sons of Man (had) built.
>
> Hi ti Jawe pa dimkoja vopor xaw to ceq kay to turo hu to jinbin je
> baw.
>
> 5.1: "dimkoja"... not just "dimja"?
Yeah, "dimja" does the job quite adequately.
> 5.2: "jinbin" :-) . This doesn't mean literally 'man-baby', I
> guess. 'Human race' would be closer?
Very correct. I'm wallowing in Hebrew whackytalk. Probably "to jin" would
work, or maybe "to ze jin".
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> Verse 6 And YHWH said, "Behold, one nation, and [there is] one
> language for all of them, and this they have begun to do. And now, it
> will not be denied from them, all which they [will] plot to do.
>
> Hi ti jawe pa sey, "xaw! Han kawm hay, kay kuy ten smosi bol. Hi kuy
> pa farza cuba. Hi kuy zloyskim de kulba, sa bu fu besam.
>
> 6.1: Why "smosi" instead of just "han"?
No reason. Sounded more KingJamesy to me, I guess. "han" it is.
> 6.2: The last sentence seems a very loose translation and I'm having
> a hard time parsing it anyway. Can you give a literal translation?
I will try:
Hi ti jawe pa sey, "xaw! Han kawm hay, kay kuy ten smosi bol. Hi kuy
And theonenamed jawa past say "look! One nation exists/is-a-fact, and
letter-k has at the most (one) speech [yes, make it "han" = 'one'.] and
pa farza cuba. Hi kuy zloyskim de kulba, sa bu fu besam.
past do-start [yes, change to "farho"] over-there-something. And letter-k
letter-k evil-scheme (plot) all-somethings [all the somethings which they
evil-scheme] that not future be-prevented.
Whew! Next project will be translating an original English work!
With these corrections, is it ready to be posted?