Klingon: Difference between revisions

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


This page is for concerns related to BPFK sections that are already passed and checkpointed. For BPFK sections that are '''not''' passed, see the relevant section itself.
.i le bangrtlingana no'u la klingon. runti bangu .i se finti la'ogy. Marc Okrand gy. noi bauskepre ku'o mu'i tu'a le ranmi pe la star.trek. .i datni ti'u zoigy. [http://www.kli.org] gy.


ni'o la [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]. .e la [[User:Mark Shoulson|.mark.]] cu ge lojbo gi se bangrtlingana


== Tense sumtcita as of 16 Jun 2005 ==
.i ko ji'a tcidu la [[jbocre: Lojban and Klingon e la lojban. .e le bangrtlingana|Lojban and Klingon e la lojban. .e le bangrtlingana]]


In [[BPFK Section: Tense sumtcita as of 16 Jun 2005]], the examples of ''di'o'' do not match the place structure of ''diklo''. E-mail from Yanis Batura:
----


~pp~
''Ahem. Do the Klingons mention Lojban on'' their ''Wiki?''


--------------------------------------
Inasmuch as they don't have a Wiki, the question is meaningless. Lojban is certainly mentioned on their mailinglist, by persons other than me and Mark, and not with universal derision. And you may be delighted to see [http://www.kli.org/kli/langs/KLIlojban.html] .


The definition and the examples seem very dubious for me, because {diklo} is
.i mi ji'a morji lesedu'u zo'e .e'a cusku loi lojbo steci pe bau le glico .e ro da pe bau la lojban. kei ne le mriste lidne bo notci .i gonai lenu skicu le bangrtlingana bau la lojban. na se curmi da (to ca'i ma? toi) ki'u leka na steci la lojban.; gi lenu skicu loi [[jbocre: xaurselfunca gugde ralo pu'e sevzi pajni|xaurselfunca gugde ralo pu'e sevzi pajni]] .e la [[jbocre: Michael Everson aikl.Everson|Michael Everson aikl.Everson]] .e lei [[jbocre: G�del Numbers and Lojban amcu pe la gedel]] cu ji'a na se curmi da -- mi'e [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]


defined as "x1 is local to x2; x1 is confined to locus x2 within range x3".
----


{di'o} marks x1 of {diklo}, i. e. something that is local or confined to a
.i ko jmive pe clani be temci .ije ko se prali


locus. So {broda di'o da} means that there is / happens {broda} such that
* ''I'm having trouble parsing this, is it grammatically correct?'' --ColinWright
* No, it isn't. ''pe'' has to link sumti with a term (more or less), not a selbri with a selbri. It's an attempt at "Live long and prosper," I presume, which might be ''ko ze'u jmive gi'e se prali'' (I don't much like ''se prali'' for "prosper" though). It's probably pretty poor as a command; likely better as ''.a'o do ze'u jmive...'' --mi'e mark


{da} is confined to its locus. Consider the example {mi se jibri le sampla
* Ah. I use either ''ko ze'u jmive gi'e snada'' or ''ze'uku ko jmive gi'e snada'', depending on how I'm feeling. Should we remove this exchange and edit the above to something better? --ColinWright


di'o la ibubymym}. If {la ibumbum} is x1 of {diklo}, then {la ibumbum} is
----


confined to a locus of where the person works with software. The sentence
[[jbocre: .kreig.daniyl.|.kreig.daniyl.]] disagree with the transliteration of ''tlhIngan'', but I will not detract from the discussion of the language I will give my reasons [[jbocre: Transliterating 'tlhIngan' heir own page|Transliterating 'tlhIngan' heir own page]]
 
actually means that the whole IBM is local to where the person works with
 
software! That is something different from "I work with software at IBM"...
 
I hope you got my English.
 
mi'e .ianis
 
~/pp~
 
Possible actions:
 
# Rule that all usages of "di'o" is in error, and replace real examples with (correct) made-up ones.
 
# Devise a lujvo that fits the place structure of "di'o" as it is actually used.
 
arj (the original shepherd of the section) recommends alternative #1, as there are a handful of spatial tenses that could easily replace the use of "di'o" as intended.
 
== Text Structure cmavo as of 11 Feb 2005 ==
 
Jorge says:
 
~pp~
 
This comment is s bit misleading, as it suggests that there is something
 
special about MAI that breaks LALR(1). But even if MAI were to be removed
 
from the language, or made prefix, the problem with numbers would remain
 
just the same, because you can't tell "number MOI", "number ROI" and
 
"number /BOI/" appart from each other without indefinite lookahead,
 
the same goes for "lerfu-string MOI" vs. "lerfu-string /BOI/", and I think
 
compound tags break LALR(1) too.
 
"A term is either a sumti or a sumti preceded by a tense or modal tag."
 
Also: "na ku", "tag ku" and the most weird "fa ku" are terms.
 
mu'o mi'e xorxes
 
~/pp~
 
== Digressives ==
 
lojbab says:
 
~pp~
 
1. sei
 
I think it should be clarified what it means "no trailing sumti", and
 
possibly rephrased because the "no trailing sumti" should be distinct
 
from the rest of the definition (as it is, the wording suggests that
 
there is some other word that starts a discursive bridi that CAN have
 
trailing sumti).  Putting it in 2 sentences would probably solve this.
 
For the former comment, it should be noted that
 
i ku'i fe'e mo'a roi trene sei mi kelci pilno be zo roi
 
is perfectly legal - i.e. trailing sumti have to be attached with be/bei
 
~/pp~
 
* I suspect, strongly, that this can be fixed in the PEG, but haven't actually looked at it yet.  Does anyone know the reason for this restriction? -- rlpowell

Revision as of 16:56, 4 November 2013

.i le bangrtlingana no'u la klingon. runti bangu .i se finti la'ogy. Marc Okrand gy. noi bauskepre ku'o mu'i tu'a le ranmi pe la star.trek. .i datni ti'u zoigy. [1] gy.

ni'o la nitcion. .e la .mark. cu ge lojbo gi se bangrtlingana

.i ko ji'a tcidu la Lojban and Klingon e la lojban. .e le bangrtlingana


Ahem. Do the Klingons mention Lojban on their Wiki?

Inasmuch as they don't have a Wiki, the question is meaningless. Lojban is certainly mentioned on their mailinglist, by persons other than me and Mark, and not with universal derision. And you may be delighted to see [2] .

.i mi ji'a morji lesedu'u zo'e .e'a cusku loi lojbo steci pe bau le glico .e ro da pe bau la lojban. kei ne le mriste lidne bo notci .i gonai lenu skicu le bangrtlingana bau la lojban. na se curmi da (to ca'i ma? toi) ki'u leka na steci la lojban.; gi lenu skicu loi xaurselfunca gugde ralo pu'e sevzi pajni .e la Michael Everson aikl.Everson .e lei [[jbocre: G�del Numbers and Lojban amcu pe la gedel]] cu ji'a na se curmi da -- mi'e nitcion


.i ko jmive pe clani be temci .ije ko se prali

  • I'm having trouble parsing this, is it grammatically correct? --ColinWright
  • No, it isn't. pe has to link sumti with a term (more or less), not a selbri with a selbri. It's an attempt at "Live long and prosper," I presume, which might be ko ze'u jmive gi'e se prali (I don't much like se prali for "prosper" though). It's probably pretty poor as a command; likely better as .a'o do ze'u jmive... --mi'e mark
  • Ah. I use either ko ze'u jmive gi'e snada or ze'uku ko jmive gi'e snada, depending on how I'm feeling. Should we remove this exchange and edit the above to something better? --ColinWright

.kreig.daniyl. disagree with the transliteration of tlhIngan, but I will not detract from the discussion of the language I will give my reasons Transliterating 'tlhIngan' heir own page