lojban Anthem English translation: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:


A [http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?query=lambda+calculus efinition] of lambda calculus.
[[Lojban Anthem|Lojban Anthem ere is the Lojban Anthem in Lojban]].


What looks to be a [http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~lloyd/tildeFP/Lambda/Ch/ ecent intro to lambda calculus].
The following is the translation by me ([[User:tsali|(tsali]]).


[[jbocre: John Cowan|John Cowan]] [http://balance.wiw.org/~jkominek/lojban/9411/msg00114.html nce explained lambda calculus], briefly, on the Lojban list.
^Language of exactness mixed with inexactness too,


[http://users.info.unicaen.fr/~tlebarbe/Linguistics_Lexicon/ll_l.html#lambda-operator] is a very brief discussion of lambda calculus as pertains to linguistics.
let your quality of the expression of ideas be given


----
to the voices of the Earth, who need a new way


Nick's stuff posted to the list:
for people to communicate with one another.


In terms of programming, lambda calculus is very easy to explain. You know
Language!  Lojbanic!


formal parameters and actual parameters? Well, the function with just the
Minds who confuse the many who wish


formal parameters is a "lambda expression", and the formal parameters are
to understand, be carried to the source from the listeners.


the "lambda variables":
Please be said clearly, and mix


LAMBDA x . Factorial (x)
that which half-way ends up inside the boundaries of bad grammar.


{
Ideas expressed through language!  Lojbanic!^


Factorial = Factorial (x-1) * x
I read Lojbab's translation (below) a few years ago, but couldn't remember much of it when I wrote my own translation.  I believe that my translation is correct.  {le selmenli} is that which has a mind, not what's on the mind.  And the place structure of {bevri} is to...from, not vice versa.  Furthermore, {farvi} is that which develops, not the development, so {le norfarvi} should be something like {le nu farvi sisti}.  [[User:Bob LeChevalier|Bob LeChevalier]], go and write a new anthem! ~np~:^)~/np~ -[[User:tsali|tsali]]


}
* ... Crap. Probably 1991-2001 gismu place structure incompatibilities. This will not do. OK, I'll rewrite it in the erroneous parts... -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]
* ... selmenli => selpensi; do'u bevri ko le cfari lei zgatirna => cu selmuvdu ko le cfari fa lei tirna. norfarvi, I don't know what to do with; I'm inclined to leave it alone, since the 'stagnation' meaning is, I think, still encompassed by it.


What's x? x is an empty slot, of course. Which gets filled by the actual
----


value you call it with --- the actual parameter.
Original revision: ''.i doi selpensi co cfipt be le so'imei poi djica


Factorial(9).
le ka jimpe cu selmuvdu ko le cfari fa lei tirna''


ce'u, it is claimed, corresponds to that lambda variable x. It's just a
*''How does that parse? [[jbofi'e|jbofi'e]] doesn't like it; it barfs on the ''cu'' of ''cu selmuvdu''. If I replace ''doi'' with ''le'', then it's fine (though then ''selmuvdu'' has two x1 places: the ''le'' phrase that comes before the selbri and the ''fa lei tirna'' at the end). Maybe it doesn't like long things after ''doi'', or doesn't allow them to be treated as sumti?Hm, if I replace ''cu selmuvdu ko'' with ''do'u selmuvdu ko'', it parses and appears to mean roughly what is intended. But then the rhythm is a bit off, of course, since ''do'u'' is two syllables compared to one for ''cu''. Maybe I should replace ''do'u'' with the shorter and still grammatical ''vaukeikuvauku'okube'odo'u'' zo'o.~np~Hm^2~/np~, I think this is an evidential sentence preceded by a vocative... which would explain why the ''cu'' wasn't allowed there, since it didn't separate the selbri from any arguments. So perhaps jbofi'e was right in barfing when it saw ''cu'' without a sumti before it.~np~Hm^3~/np~, I just noticed that lojbab's original version indeed had ''do'u'', rather than ''cu'', before the selbri (which was ''bevri'' in his version.) --[[pne|pne]]''
**Touche. I know why I did it, and I know that this grammar will one day fall. Changed to ''le ka jimpe do'u pagre ko le cfari fa lei tirna''. And no, that needn't be the other way round. Think about it...


formal param, in programming terms. {ka} is a subroutine in the program
The translation then becomes:


that hasn't been called; it's just a piece of code, with no computed
Thoughts which confuse the many who wish


value.
to understand, be portals to the originators for the listeners.


The minute you fill the value in (call the subroutine), it is further
----
 
claimed, you no longer have an abstract piece of code, but something
 
that's computed a value (true or false, in the Logic universe.) This turns
 
{ka} with {ce'u} (something which isn't true or false) into {du'u}
 
(something which is true or false.) Nothing with {ce'u} in it, I'd further
 
claim, can be true or false.
 
We've been talking about lambda calculus because that's the theoretical


guts of formal semantics (and of [[jbocre: Computer Science|Computer Science]]). But in itself, it's
Here is the original translation by [[User:Bob LeChevalier|Bob LeChevalier]]. Note that there is no translation of the chorus, as it was added by [[User:Nick Nicholas ick Nicholas|nitcion ick Nicholas]] when he composed the melody.


just like [[jbocre: programming|programming]] (precisely *because* it is the theoretical guts of
^O, language, both exact and non-exact,


[[jbocre: Computer Science|Computer Science]] (along with two(?) other equally valid and equally powerful forms of computation]
Let your characteristic mode of idea-expression


Now, if the above is *not* accessible to non-programmers, I guess I'm
be given to the voiced ones of the earth, who need this


sorry; programmers and logician-linguists are the only people who are
new method of mutually communicating between minds.


interested (OK, and some theoretical mathematicians.) So the tutorials
O ideas which confuse the many who desire understanding,


online do tend to assume geekdom.
Let yourself be carried from those who initiate you to those who listen.


Then again, Lojban tends to, too. :-)
Please be clearly expressed, stirring


Er, hope this has helped.
the stagnation caused by the limits of Grammar.^

Latest revision as of 10:05, 14 January 2015

Lojban Anthem ere is the Lojban Anthem in Lojban.

The following is the translation by me ((tsali).

^Language of exactness mixed with inexactness too,

let your quality of the expression of ideas be given

to the voices of the Earth, who need a new way

for people to communicate with one another.

Language! Lojbanic!

Minds who confuse the many who wish

to understand, be carried to the source from the listeners.

Please be said clearly, and mix

that which half-way ends up inside the boundaries of bad grammar.

Ideas expressed through language! Lojbanic!^

I read Lojbab's translation (below) a few years ago, but couldn't remember much of it when I wrote my own translation. I believe that my translation is correct. {le selmenli} is that which has a mind, not what's on the mind. And the place structure of {bevri} is to...from, not vice versa. Furthermore, {farvi} is that which develops, not the development, so {le norfarvi} should be something like {le nu farvi sisti}. Bob LeChevalier, go and write a new anthem! ~np~:^)~/np~ -tsali

  • ... Crap. Probably 1991-2001 gismu place structure incompatibilities. This will not do. OK, I'll rewrite it in the erroneous parts... -- nitcion
  • ... selmenli => selpensi; do'u bevri ko le cfari lei zgatirna => cu selmuvdu ko le cfari fa lei tirna. norfarvi, I don't know what to do with; I'm inclined to leave it alone, since the 'stagnation' meaning is, I think, still encompassed by it.

Original revision: .i doi selpensi co cfipt be le so'imei poi djica

le ka jimpe cu selmuvdu ko le cfari fa lei tirna

  • How does that parse? jbofi'e doesn't like it; it barfs on the cu of cu selmuvdu. If I replace doi with le, then it's fine (though then selmuvdu has two x1 places: the le phrase that comes before the selbri and the fa lei tirna at the end). Maybe it doesn't like long things after doi, or doesn't allow them to be treated as sumti?Hm, if I replace cu selmuvdu ko with do'u selmuvdu ko, it parses and appears to mean roughly what is intended. But then the rhythm is a bit off, of course, since do'u is two syllables compared to one for cu. Maybe I should replace do'u with the shorter and still grammatical vaukeikuvauku'okube'odo'u zo'o.~np~Hm^2~/np~, I think this is an evidential sentence preceded by a vocative... which would explain why the cu wasn't allowed there, since it didn't separate the selbri from any arguments. So perhaps jbofi'e was right in barfing when it saw cu without a sumti before it.~np~Hm^3~/np~, I just noticed that lojbab's original version indeed had do'u, rather than cu, before the selbri (which was bevri in his version.) --pne
    • Touche. I know why I did it, and I know that this grammar will one day fall. Changed to le ka jimpe do'u pagre ko le cfari fa lei tirna. And no, that needn't be the other way round. Think about it...

The translation then becomes:

Thoughts which confuse the many who wish

to understand, be portals to the originators for the listeners.

Here is the original translation by Bob LeChevalier. Note that there is no translation of the chorus, as it was added by nitcion ick Nicholas when he composed the melody.

^O, language, both exact and non-exact,

Let your characteristic mode of idea-expression

be given to the voiced ones of the earth, who need this

new method of mutually communicating between minds.

O ideas which confuse the many who desire understanding,

Let yourself be carried from those who initiate you to those who listen.

Please be clearly expressed, stirring

the stagnation caused by the limits of Grammar.^

Retrieved from "https://mw-live.lojban.org/index.php?title=lojban_Anthem_English_translation&oldid=111028"