Be prepared to facepalm:

historical reasons.

http://jbotcan.org/cllc/c14/s3.html

oh man, we should have avoided the legacy of lohglan and start fresh with completely new words for concepts and word classes, so we won't be restrained in our thoughts and conquer the universe at the speed of light!

now it's all for naught :(

{lo'u .. le'u} quotes Lojban words that may or may not be grammatical. As I have observed it used, it is used to quote partial and incomplete sentences, or when in doubt about the grammatical validity of an utterance.

http://www.lojban.org/no/publications/reference_grammar/chapter15.html

hey, TomSFox showed to be a real arse on IRC earlier today, you might as well not bother with his significantly dumb remarks. he's clearly in denial about the whole issue. you're like "being feminin is considered second-class" and he's like "THATS NOT SEXISM ALL PEOPLE EVER COMPLAIN ABOUT IS SEXISM TOWARDS WOMEN YOU DOUBLE STANDARDS IDIOT!!!111"

< Broca> Don't you guys know that Youtube comments are, like, the stupidest forum on the Internet or something?

so true!

and also: have i ever seen you before?
if not: fi'i doi mirandansar ui

Indeed. He's a (recently ex-)Lojbanist. He came in this morning to #lojban to tell us that he's leaving for Esperanto because it's so much better. After an ensuing argument, I gave him the boot.

mu'o mi'e bancus, The Resident Asshole of #lojban

the second one. each sumtcita (and tense words are sumtcita) can take a sumti or {ku}

>>558

But "ne'i ve'u" is a single compound tag, so there is no elided KU in the middle.

"ne'i ku ve'u lo kumfa [ku]" is grammatical too, it's two separate terms, but the first "ku" can't be elided.

>>550

Do you mean that the translation of "human being" should be "prenu", or that the declaration should have covered non-human persons as well?

The original talks about human beings, so "remna" seems like the correct translation.

>>552

Well, the translation of "human being" obviously should be "[remna]". However, bbeing a big science fiction fan, I think that these rights should be extended to all sentient beings. Although the English document actually does use "human", the English connotation is just vague enough to imply "not just Homo sapiens sapiens". The Lojbanic translation should go with the meaning of the document, or at least its possible future meaning, and use "[prenu]".

>>552

A "remna" is a biological/taxonomical entity, from which a "prenu" ontologically extends if not differs. "remna" is about the body, "prenu" the mind/consciousness. The declaration appeals more to our mental capability than to our physical functionality. If linguistic fidelity to the English matters, "remna" should be the one to be used. But if the philosophical design and implication of the message are more important, I would take liberty to use "prenu".

>>547

1 )Which is which (for the apple v. other thing example)?

2) When would you use those two?

>>549

mi nitcu lo drata stizu ki'u lo nu lo vi stizu cu spofu
I need another chair because this one is broken.
(another = other than this one)

mi nitcu lo za'u moi stizu ki'u lo nu lo cnino vitke cu tolci'a
I need another chair because a new guest has arrived.
(another = an additional one)

>>553

tolci'a -> tolcliva

No. "lo cribe" can indeed mean "bears" as in "bears like honey": "lo cribe cu nelci lo bifysakta". But I don't know how that can be described as "the idea of bearness likes honey". I doubt that an idea of bearness can have any preference for any kind of food.