@kehanocy no the zo quotes what comes next (the first si). the nect si kills the quoted first si, then the 3rd sii kills the zo that started the whole thing. though I'm hearing that "zo si" produces a single entity which the secod zo wipes out all of. so depending on who you ask, this song may be "broken" :(
Thanks for the response. Although I'm still confused. If I say "mi cusku zo si" at this point I'm saying "I say 'si' " now the next "si" erases the "si" from earlier, so now aren't we at "mi cusku zo" and then the third "si" would make it back into "mi cusku zo si". Wouldn't it?
zo si na ka'e vimcu lo cmavo be zo si .i lo cusku ma'i lo za'i da'i na go'i cu na'e-ka'e vimcu za'u-pa valsi
{si} is not capable of erasing cmavo of class SI. The speaker, if, hypothetically speaking, this were not the case, would be incapable of erasing more than one word.
@lukeabergen no... as he said the first 'si' is trying to erase 'zo' but 'zo' means repeat. Therefore, 'repeat' apparently wins out over 'forget'. The second 'si' is then needed to erase the 'zo', now that the 'zo' has used up its' meaning, in a sense... and the third 'si'... huh... it is left over, is it not? Does that then erase cusku?
@kehanocy no the zo quotes what comes next (the first si). the nect si kills the quoted first si, then the 3rd sii kills the zo that started the whole thing. though I'm hearing that "zo si" produces a single entity which the secod zo wipes out all of. so depending on who you ask, this song may be "broken" :(
lukeabergen 1 year ago
LOL
kehanocy 1 year ago
Hah, wonderful! :) (Now I want to learn lojban even more.)
The swedish song, btw, is about frogs that have neither ears nor tails...
Volatile314 1 year ago
ui gleki mu'i lo du'u zo la'ai e zo sa'ai e zo le'ai pu'o zasti
i ki'e do lo do skina cu mansa
djancak 2 years ago
mi nelci le do selsa'a doi selckik
Homofilos 2 years ago
melbi selsa'a doi selckik
Luke, the short answer is that (barring the magic word zo), any string of "si" 's are considerd as a whole, and erase that many words backwards.
gejyspa 2 years ago
that's true. It would be a shame to ruin such a great song. I am curious about this though. Maybe I will bring this up on the mailing list. :)
lukeabergen 2 years ago
.i ji'a mi mutce nelci lo selsa'a .u'isai
lukeabergen 2 years ago
Thanks for the response. Although I'm still confused. If I say "mi cusku zo si" at this point I'm saying "I say 'si' " now the next "si" erases the "si" from earlier, so now aren't we at "mi cusku zo" and then the third "si" would make it back into "mi cusku zo si". Wouldn't it?
lukeabergen 2 years ago
You could be right, Luke! The only argument I can think of against your interpretation is that it would ruin Daniel's awesome song.
selckiku 2 years ago
u'isai
Homofilos 2 years ago
zo si na ka'e vimcu lo cmavo be zo si .i lo cusku ma'i lo za'i da'i na go'i cu na'e-ka'e vimcu za'u-pa valsi
{si} is not capable of erasing cmavo of class SI. The speaker, if, hypothetically speaking, this were not the case, would be incapable of erasing more than one word.
Twey0 2 years ago
that would mean zo breaks si, and that would suck
djancak 2 years ago
@lukeabergen no... as he said the first 'si' is trying to erase 'zo' but 'zo' means repeat. Therefore, 'repeat' apparently wins out over 'forget'. The second 'si' is then needed to erase the 'zo', now that the 'zo' has used up its' meaning, in a sense... and the third 'si'... huh... it is left over, is it not? Does that then erase cusku?
kehanocy 1 year ago