cu needed sometimes when unexpected gotcha: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


coi ro jboprenu .i mi'e braiyn.vebyr.
think about the following for a moment:


.i xabju la [[jbocre: kalifornias|kalifornias]].
.i le birka be la djan. spofu


.i mi tadni le skina saske .i ji'a loi bangu cu cinri mi
this is a arm-of-john kind of break, instead of the (likely intended) john's arm is broken:


*There must be something in the introductory material which suggests that it is very lojbanic to omit obvious sumti. In my first post, I also removed the mi from mi xabju. I got told off for it, but I am convinced that it is the way it should be done.
.i le birka be la djan. cu spofu
**''Chapter 2 of the lessons: "We've seen that if we don't need all the places (and we rarely do), then we can miss out the unnecessary ones at the end of the bridi. We can also miss out the first place if it is obvious (just as in Spanish)."''


*The x1 of cinri must be an abstraction, try ''li'o cu jai cinri mi'' or ''tu'a loi bangu cu cinri mi'' See the last chapter of the [[jbocre: lessons|lessons]] for exceedingly concise and useful information. (that chapter certainly counts among [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]'s more brillian pieces of lojban authorships)
without the cu the spofu is considered part of a tanru-selbri for the le.
**''I'm on that last chapter right now; I can't help but wish it had come earlier in the text though, as I've been developing bad habits which I now have to unlearn!''
 
*mi'e [[jbocre: .greg.|greg.]]
 
Brion Vibber; I've been off-and-on lurking on the mailing list and dabbling with the book and the lessons since stumbling into Lojban around '98 or '99, but never really did more than get my feet wet. Lately my enthusiasm for Lojban has been picking up, particularly since hearing that the LLG has decided to start using its own language officially, and I'm working my way through the [[jbocre: lessons|lessons]] book.
 
If you see any malglico or [[jbocre: Esperanto albangresperanto|Esperanto albangresperanto]] (or just any old malselsrera) in my lojban, please point it out and correct.
 
*I would say that malselsrera is semantically wrong. ''[[jbocre: mabla|mabla]]'' does not mean bad, it means that this selbri is used in a derogatory fashion --[[jbocre: .greg.|greg.]]
**''Hmm, is it wrong to refer to errors derogatorily?''
 
[mailto:b|brion@pobox.com]] termri
 
----
 
Since you study film science, do you have any thoughts on how a Lojban instructional video could be designed/arranged/plotted/scripted/whatever?
 
* ''I can't say that language instructional videos have come up as a class topic very frequently! But I can regurgitate some of what I've heard about the design of the Esperanto video course ''Pasporto al la Tuta Mondo'' (in a bit; I took some notes at the presentation, I'll see if I can dig them up).''
** Really? You'd think there is good money to be made there. (Presumably there can only be so many Miyazakis and Spielbergs) Are there at least optional courses on producing educational or instructional material? --jay
 
*** ''Well, do writing programs regularly focus on how to write language textbooks (or quantum mechanics textbooks)? It's only one specialized topic out of thousands, and the specialization here is in the realm of pedogogy rather than the theory or practice of filmmaking.''
**** I've seen courses on writing technical documentation (I've seen entire degrees in the field). That is more analagous to what I was asking about immediately above, than the writing of textbooks on a particular subject. I've never looked to see if there are courses on writing textbooks. Presumably you use enough of them that you develop some idea of what they need to include. The watching of instructional videos (on any topic) isn't usually that common. By the time you're a professor qualified to write a textbook, you've usually seen hundreds of the things, and compared them in detail to determine which ones to use for courses. I'm not sure what sorts of people would've viewed hundreds of instructional videos.

Revision as of 16:46, 4 November 2013

think about the following for a moment:

.i le birka be la djan. spofu

this is a arm-of-john kind of break, instead of the (likely intended) john's arm is broken:

.i le birka be la djan. cu spofu

without the cu the spofu is considered part of a tanru-selbri for the le.

Retrieved from "https://mw-live.lojban.org/index.php?title=cu_needed_sometimes_when_unexpected_gotcha&oldid=74689"