Lojban In General

de'i li 09 pi'e 09 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> Can you read this and tell me if it is correct?
.skamyxatra

First of all, you need to remember that sentences in Lojban *always* need to be
separated with "{.i}" (or "{ni'o}/{no'i}"). Whitespace doesn't count. Also,
due to the frequent lack of grammar, I had to guess at most of what you were
trying to say and offered possible corrected translations for those meanings.

> fanmo fe lo carvi .i jarco fe dilnu
You left out a "{lo}/{loi}/{le}/{lei}" before "{dilnu}." Also, as there is no
{sumti} before these sentences' {selbri}, the x1 place is implicitly filled by
"{zo'e}," so it's not necessary to label the next place with "{fe}."

> le solri capu'o jarco le nenli'i pe le solri
> ki'u mi tatpi mi kanla punli
I'm not sure what you're tring to say here. Assuming that the second line is a
separate sentence and that "{ki'u}" (which means "because of reason/
justification") is a typo for "{ku'i}" ("however"), it appears that you're
trying to say something about your swollen eyes being tired, but it comes out
as something nongrammatical & somewhat nonsensical. If you are trying to say,
"My swollen eyes are tired," that would be something closer to "{lo mi punli
kanla cu tatpi}."

> ku'i mi viska lo tsani
> tsani melbi
Literally, the second line translates as "(Observe) Sky-beautiful." If you're
trying to say that the sky is beautiful, that would be "{lo tsani cu melbi}."

> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
"I *will* be random at the *present* time"? While grammatical, that seems
semantically suspect. Also, the "{fe}" here is unnecessary.

> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
Assuming that the "{ki'u}" here is actually supposed to mean "because of
reason" and is connected to the line before it (This is what happens when you
don't delimit your sentences as required), "{le cabna ba cfari balvi}" needs to
be made into a single {sumti} consisting of an abstraction; i.e., follow the
"{ki'u}" with "{le nu}." Also, you might want to rethink your wording here;
perhaps "{le cabna co'a balvi}"?

> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
If you're trying to say "after 5 years," use "{ba}" instead of "{bancu}," and
you can then probably get rid of the "{ba}" later in the sentence. Secondly,
I'm pretty sure that you can't attach "{nai}" to a {selbri}; "not important"
would be "{na'e vajni}" (or "{na vajni}," but I don't think that's what you're
trying to get across).

> ja'e mi prami le cabna
Again, you need to make the {bridi} into an abstraction {sumti} with "{le nu}."
Either that or change "{ja'e} to "{.ija'ebo}."

> .ijanai mi le djica fasnunai
"...if my desire does not happen" is "{.ijanai le se djica be mi na fasnu}."
Also, I'm not sure whether the result of your desire not happening is meant to
be the sentence before or the sentence after. Currently, it's the sentence
before. To make it the sentence after, one way would be to change "{.ijanai}"
to "{.iganai}" and replace the "{.i}" between this sentence and the next with
"{gi}."

> mi xenrunai balvi
Again, you can't attach "{nai}" to a {selbri}. Also, assuming that you mean to
say "I do not rue the future," that would be "{mi na xenru lo balvi}."

> mi farlu cumki ku'i viska fe le jvinu
"I can fall; however, I would see the view" (assuming that's what you mean)
would be something like "{lenu mi farlu cu cumki .i ku'i mi viska le jvinu}"
(Someone else should probably confirm the second part).

> mi litru fe le jvinu
You travel with the view as your route? (Also, the "{fe}" is still
unnecessary.)

> .ijanai mi pu sfani
> mi djica mi le djica fasnu
"I want my desire to happen" is "{mi djica lenu le se djica be mi fasnu}."

> mi le djica
> ba fasnu
As before, "my desire" is "{le se djica be mi}."

> mi ba jdice cumkinai balvi
My best guess for what you're trying to say here is "I will decide on an
impossible future," which would be something like "{mi ba jdice tu'a lo to'e
cumki balvi}."

> cabna mi djica prami
"Now I desire love" is "{caku mi djica loka prami}."

> mi cadzu ce'o mi cinba do
I'm pretty sure that all this needs is a "{.i}" before the "{ce'o}."

> do cinba mi ce'o mi gleki
Again, you need a "{.i}" before the "{ce'o}."

> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
> ja'e mi prami le cabna
> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
> ja'e mi prami le cabna
See my comments for the first use of these lines above.

> Thank you, I wrote this with help of the dictionary.
I think you should spend more time studying the grammar.

mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.
--
mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

> de'i li 09 pi'e 09 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
>> Can you read this and tell me if it is correct?
> .skamyxatra
>

(snip lengthy and very helpful reply)

I think it's important to remember at this stage that
lojban is specifically designed to be different from
all known natural languages. In most cases in a new
langauge you can point and say a single relevant word,
and people magically can understand most of what you're
trying to say. If they don't they grunt, and you can
pick a different, random relevant word.

Natural languages are magic, and the more we study them
the clearer it is that they shouldn't work as well as
they do. Somehow meaning is conveyed, almost mystically.

Lojban isn't like that, so the grammar and the structure
is important. It's fantastic that you're trying this out
and making an effort with just a dictionary. Don't be
disheartened that your grammar now needs some work.

If you're into poetry, try making very, very short,
grammatically correct sentences that create the effect.
Long, ballad-like laments are one type, but consider
haiku.

And keep at it. Very admirable.

mi'e kolin.
> First of all, you need to remember that sentences in Lojban *always* need
> to be
> separated with "{.i}" (or "{ni'o}/{no'i}"). Whitespace doesn't count.
> Also,
> due to the frequent lack of grammar, I had to guess at most of what you
> were
> trying to say and offered possible corrected translations for those
> meanings.
>
>> fanmo fe lo carvi .i jarco fe dilnu
> You left out a "{lo}/{loi}/{le}/{lei}" before "{dilnu}." Also, as there
> is no
> {sumti} before these sentences' {selbri}, the x1 place is implicitly
> filled by
> "{zo'e}," so it's not necessary to label the next place with "{fe}."
>
>> le solri capu'o jarco le nenli'i pe le solri
>> ki'u mi tatpi mi kanla punli
> I'm not sure what you're tring to say here. Assuming that the second line
> is a
> separate sentence and that "{ki'u}" (which means "because of reason/
> justification") is a typo for "{ku'i}" ("however"), it appears that you're
> trying to say something about your swollen eyes being tired, but it comes
> out
> as something nongrammatical & somewhat nonsensical. If you are trying to
> say,
> "My swollen eyes are tired," that would be something closer to "{lo mi
> punli
> kanla cu tatpi}."
>
>> ku'i mi viska lo tsani
>> tsani melbi
> Literally, the second line translates as "(Observe) Sky-beautiful." If
> you're
> trying to say that the sky is beautiful, that would be "{lo tsani cu
> melbi}."
>
>> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
> "I *will* be random at the *present* time"? While grammatical, that seems
> semantically suspect. Also, the "{fe}" here is unnecessary.
>
>> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
> Assuming that the "{ki'u}" here is actually supposed to mean "because of
> reason" and is connected to the line before it (This is what happens when
> you
> don't delimit your sentences as required), "{le cabna ba cfari balvi}"
> needs to
> be made into a single {sumti} consisting of an abstraction; i.e., follow
> the
> "{ki'u}" with "{le nu}." Also, you might want to rethink your wording
> here;
> perhaps "{le cabna co'a balvi}"?
>
>> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
> If you're trying to say "after 5 years," use "{ba}" instead of "{bancu},"
> and
> you can then probably get rid of the "{ba}" later in the sentence.
> Secondly,
> I'm pretty sure that you can't attach "{nai}" to a {selbri}; "not
> important"
> would be "{na'e vajni}" (or "{na vajni}," but I don't think that's what
> you're
> trying to get across).
>
>> ja'e mi prami le cabna
> Again, you need to make the {bridi} into an abstraction {sumti} with "{le
> nu}."
> Either that or change "{ja'e} to "{.ija'ebo}."
>
>> .ijanai mi le djica fasnunai
> "...if my desire does not happen" is "{.ijanai le se djica be mi na
> fasnu}."
> Also, I'm not sure whether the result of your desire not happening is
> meant to
> be the sentence before or the sentence after. Currently, it's the
> sentence
> before. To make it the sentence after, one way would be to change
> "{.ijanai}"
> to "{.iganai}" and replace the "{.i}" between this sentence and the next
> with
> "{gi}."
>
>> mi xenrunai balvi
> Again, you can't attach "{nai}" to a {selbri}. Also, assuming that you
> mean to
> say "I do not rue the future," that would be "{mi na xenru lo balvi}."
>
>> mi farlu cumki ku'i viska fe le jvinu
> "I can fall; however, I would see the view" (assuming that's what you
> mean)
> would be something like "{lenu mi farlu cu cumki .i ku'i mi viska le
> jvinu}"
> (Someone else should probably confirm the second part).
>
>> mi litru fe le jvinu
> You travel with the view as your route? (Also, the "{fe}" is still
> unnecessary.)
>
>> .ijanai mi pu sfani
>> mi djica mi le djica fasnu
> "I want my desire to happen" is "{mi djica lenu le se djica be mi fasnu}."
>
>> mi le djica
>> ba fasnu
> As before, "my desire" is "{le se djica be mi}."
>
>> mi ba jdice cumkinai balvi
> My best guess for what you're trying to say here is "I will decide on an
> impossible future," which would be something like "{mi ba jdice tu'a lo
> to'e
> cumki balvi}."
>
>> cabna mi djica prami
> "Now I desire love" is "{caku mi djica loka prami}."
>
>> mi cadzu ce'o mi cinba do
> I'm pretty sure that all this needs is a "{.i}" before the "{ce'o}."
>
>> do cinba mi ce'o mi gleki
> Again, you need a "{.i}" before the "{ce'o}."
>
>> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
>> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
>> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
>> ja'e mi prami le cabna
>> mi ba cunso fe le cabna
>> ki'u le cabna ba cfari balvi
>> bancu mu nanca levi seljdi ba vajninai
>> ja'e mi prami le cabna
> See my comments for the first use of these lines above.
>
>> Thank you, I wrote this with help of the dictionary.
> I think you should spend more time studying the grammar.
>
> mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.
> --
> mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
>
>

--
Denbridge Marine Limited may monitor email traffic data and the
content of email for the purposes of security and staff training.

Denbridge Marine Limited.
Registered in England and Wales at DSG, 43 Castle St, Liverpool. L2 9TL.
Registered Number 4850477

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

Ok, I understand "cu" now. It's like "is" when used with a noun + adjective.

So it's noun + cu + adjective. "Cu" needs to desperate these words to that no one misunderstands.

What I DON'T understand is how "my desire" translates into "le se djica be mi". Why is "se" there? I thought "se" was used to switch positions between two words? Can I just write "le djica be mi"? If not, what would "le djica be mi" mean?

Can someone elaborate on how "be" should be used?

Lojban is so difficult...

also, how does "now I desire love" translates into "caku mi djica loka prami"? What is "caku" and "loka"? I've never heard those words.

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 8:14 PM, arpgme <lojban-out@lojban.org> wrote:
>
> Ok, I understand "cu" now. It's like "is" when used with a noun + adjective.

Yes, it's similar:

lo plise cu kukte
Apples are delicious.

Or noun + noun:

lo plise cu grute
Apples are fruits.

Or noun + prepositional phrase:

lo plise cu cpana lo jubme
Apples are on the table.

Or noun + verb:

lo plise cu farlu
Apples fall.

> What I DON'T understand is how "my desire" translates into "le se djica be mi". Why is "se" there? I thought "se" was used to switch positions between two words?

That's why. x1 of {djica} is the one who desires, x2 is the desire.

> Can I just write "le djica be mi"? If not, what would "le djica be mi" mean?

"The desirer of me". i.e. "the one who desires me".

> Can someone elaborate on how "be" should be used?

You can think of {be} as English "of" in many cases.

> Lojban is so difficult...

Nah, it just takes some practice.

m'o mi'e xorxes

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

de'i li 11 pi'e 09 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> Ok, I understand "cu" now. It's like "is" when used with a noun + adjective.
>
> So it's noun + cu + adjective. "Cu" needs to desperate these words to that no
> one misunderstands.
.skamyxatra

You're right that "{cu}" is needed to separate the words (I assume that's what
you meant to type), but it's not really correct to compare it to "is." First
of all, the "is" is built into the definition of the adjective*, and using it
as the verb (or "{selbri}") of the sentence automatically makes the "is" part
of the English translation. The entire purpose of "{cu}" is to separate a
{bridi}'s {selbri} from any {selbri} that come immediately before it (e.g.,
inside a {sumti}); without the "{cu}", the {selbri} run together into one long
{selbri}.

la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> What I DON'T understand is how "my desire" translates into "le se djica be
> mi". Why is "se" there? I thought "se" was used to switch positions between
> two words? Can I just write "le djica be mi"? If not, what would "le djica be
> mi" mean?
>
> Can someone elaborate on how "be" should be used?
.skamyxatra

Pay close attention to the definition of "{djica}": "x1 desires/wants/wishes x2
(event/state) for purpose x3." When you place a "{le}" in front of a {selbri},
you create a {sumti} which is capable of filling the x1 place of that {selbri}.
Thus, "{le djica}" is a person or entity who desires something — "the
desirer." The "{se}" causes the x1 and x2 places of a {selbri} to be switched,
so "{le se}" gives you a {sumti} that fills the x2 place of the affected
{selbri}; thus, "{le se djica}" is the event or state being desired, i.e., the
desire itself. "{be}" allows you to fill in the places of a {selbri} that is
already being used inside a {sumti} (technically, it's a lot more complicated
than that, but it's a good enough explanation for now). Attaching "{be mi}" to
a {sumti} limits it to things which take the x1 place of the {selbri} and have
"{mi}" ("I", "me") as the x2 place of that {selbri}. Thus, "{le se djica be
mi}" is a thing which is desired by the speaker; in other words, "my desire."

"{le djica be mi}" is rather nonsensical (and either grammatically or
semantically incorrect) and roughly means "the thing which desires the event or
state that is I."

la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> Lojban is so difficult...
.skamyxatra

You'll get used to it. Just stop thinking like a natural language speaker.

mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.

• Important side note: In English, speakers sometimes use nouns as verbs,

"verbing" them. In Lojban, {brivla} (words other than names & grammatical
operators) start out as verbs and are nouned, adjectified, & adverbialized as
needed. Hence, "{melbi}" in its default state as a verb (a.k.a. a "{selbri}")
means "is beautiful." Used as a noun (or "{sumti}"), "{le melbi}" is a thing
which is beatiful. Used to modify another {brivla} in a {tanru}, "{melbi}"
acts like an adjective or adverb (depending on how the {tanru} is being used)
that means "beautiful" or "beautifully" (literally, "of type 'beautiful'").

--
mi pu klama .i mi pu viska .i mi pu fanva fi la lojban.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

de'i li 11 pi'e 09 pi'e 2008 la'o fy. arpgme .fy. cusku zoi skamyxatra.
> also, how does "now I desire love" translates into "caku mi djica loka
> prami"? What is "caku" and "loka"? I've never heard those words.
.skamyxatra

"{caku}" and "{loka}" are actually compound {cmavo}, not individual words; the
rules of Lojban morphology allow you to leave the spaces out between {cmavo}.
"{caku}" (i.e., "{ca ku}") is the same as placing "{ca}" before a {selbri} --
it indicates that the event being described is taking place at the present
time. I chose to move it to the start of the sentence in order to more closely
match the English word order, and, in so doing, I had to attach a "{ku}" to
keep it from taking the {sumti} "{mi}" as its object.

"{loka}" ("{lo ka}"), on the other hand, converts the {bridi} following it into
a {sumti} that refers to the property or quality of the {bridi}, in this case,
the property/quality of love.

Explaining both of these things in greater detail would take too long, and I'm
not really in the mood for typing out all that. I recommend that you start
reading "Lojban for Beginners"
<http://ptolemy.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/lojbanbrochure/lessons/book1.html>, which
explains all of this, along with most of the basic Lojban grammar, in detail.

mu'omi'e la'o gy. Minimiscience .gy.

--
no zo mi nenri zo bende

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On Thursday 11 September 2008 19:14:53 arpgme wrote:
> Re: Can you read this and tell me if it is correct?
>
> Author: arpgme
>
> Ok, I understand "cu" now. It's like "is" when used with a noun +
> adjective.

There are no adjectives in Lojban, and "is" is {du}. {cu} is a predicate
marker, a part of speech which doesn't exist in English, but does exist in
Tok Pisin (see http://jbo.wiktionary.org/wiki/i for a comparison).

{du} isn't used much, because brivla are verblike ("this is a cat" is simply
{ti mlatu}; {ti du lo mlatu} is redundant). It is used when the sumti begins
with {le}, is complex, or is a name or a number.
le nanmu poi mi viska ca le prulamdei cu du le nanmu poi se flakavbu ca le
prulamna'a
The man whom I saw yesterday is the man who was arrested last year.
li vo vu'u re du li re .i la tulius. du la kikeron.

mu'omi'e .pier.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On 9/11/08, arpgme <lojban-out@lojban.org> wrote:
>
>
> What I DON'T understand is how "my desire" translates into "le se djica be
> mi". Why is "se" there? I thought "se" was used to switch positions between
> two words? Can I just write "le djica be mi"? If not, what would "le djica
> be mi" mean?
>

There are two tricky things in Lojban that are actually the same tricky
thing! One of them is that if you say:

mi do prami

That means I, you, love, I love you, and if you say

mi prami do

That means I, love, you, I love you.. you can say "prami", the selbri, after
any of the sumti. But what if you say:

prami do

That one can be a little tricky. That means "someone unspecified loves
you", it puts the "do" into the x2 spot of "prami". But "do" is the first
sumti in the sentence, so why doesn't it go in x1? Because there's this
special quality of the first sumti, before the selbri, what's sometimes
called the "head". This is one manifestation of that quality, is that if
you say the selbri first in the sentence it's assumed that you've elided the
x1 spot (though you can still get to it by saying "fa").

Another way that the head gets severed from the tail in bridi is when you
are making a sumti using an article, like "le". The head that's chopped off
is also what's referred to by the sumti. So if you have the bridi "prami
do", there's an unspecified someone in the x1 who's doing the loving. When
we make a sumti out of it with "le", we get: "le prami be do". The chopped
off x1 is who we're referring to, so the sumti refers to a lover. By using
"be" to reattach the "do", we make it a lover of you. So "le prami be do"
refers to someone that loves you.

So as you know "se" switches around the x1 and x2, so these two are the
same:

mi prami do — do se prami mi

You can also drop the head from a "se" switched sentence:

se prami mi

Someone unspecified is loved by me. Now we can make up a sumti that refers
to that missing head:

le se prami be mi

"be" is confusing, because it's just structural. The thing is we've got two
different levels of bridi going at the same time! That's why we need to
distinguish. For instance:

le se prami be mi citka
- My beloved eats.
vs
le se prami mi citka
- The beloved eats me!

Both the "citka" bridi, and the second "se prami" bridi that we've tucked
away inside the "le", are hungry for something to fill their x2 slot. If
you just say "mi", then the main bridi "citka" gets to eat it, leading to
the second (hopefully) absurd result. In order to put the "mi" into the x2
slot of the inside bridi, we say "be" in order to get access to it.

I think it might be helpful to go through a few examples.

mi klama le zarci
I go to the market.

klama le zarci
Someone unspecified goes to the market.

le klama be le zarci
The goer to the market, the market-goer.

le klama be le zarci be'o xagji
The market-goer is hungry.

Here I've used "be'o", which is a terminator for "be", to introduce it, but
you could just as well use "cu".

mi citka lo plise poi kukte
I eat an apple which is delicious.

citka lo plise poi kukte
Someone unspecified eats an apple which is delicious.

le citka be lo plise poi kukte
The eater of the apple which is delicious.

le citka be lo plise poi kukte be'o klama
The eater of the apple which is delicious is going.

How about if there's more than one trailing sumti? More than one can be
linked in with "bei":

la .boston. se klama mi fu lo karce
Boston is travelled to by me in a car.

se klama mi fu lo karce
Somewhere is travelled to by me in a car.

le se klama be mi bei fu lo karce
Somewhere that I go in a car.

le se klama be mi bei fu lo karce pu melbi
Where I went in a car was beautiful.

I terminated the "be" phrase there with a tense before a selbri (which
terminates any incompleted sumti in the open bridi), but you could as well
terminate it with "cu" or with "be'o".

I'm not sure if that's really enough to explain "be" and gadri from a
full stop, but hopefully someone out there found that
slightly clarifying.

mu'o mi'e se ckiku

On Sunday 14 September 2008 04:53:36 Brett Williams wrote:
> "be" is confusing, because it's just structural. The thing is we've got
> two different levels of bridi going at the same time! That's why we need
> to distinguish. For instance:
>
> le se prami be mi citka
> - My beloved eats.
> vs
> le se prami mi citka
> - The beloved eats me!

The first one means "the my beloved eater", and being a tanru could mean "my
beloved eater" or "the eater of my beloved". To say "My beloved eats," you
have to insert "cu" or "ku".

> le klama be le zarci be'o xagji
> The market-goer is hungry.

"the market-goer hungry", similarly.

A subclass of this construction that's useful to remember is ones where the
first selbri is a measure word:

lo milylitce be li pa margu cu grake li pacipixa

mu'omi'e pier.

To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

On 9/14/08, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:

>
>
> The first one means "the my beloved eater", and being a tanru could mean
> "my
> beloved eater" or "the eater of my beloved". To say "My beloved eats," you
> have to insert "cu" or "ku".
>

.i .u'u mi tugni .i mi me zo cu tolmorji .i'a nai
.i mi .ei zmadu kurji lo nu pilno zo cu kei ca loi nu ctuca
.i mi morji lo du'u mi jmina le me zo cu gi'e ku'i ba bo vimcu
.i mi .ai na'e jai gau se cfipu fai lo nu du'e valsi cu co'e
.i ku'i mi tolmorji lo du'u le tanru cu se zbasu
.i je ki'u la'e di'u je'u la'a .oi se cfipu
.i .oi zo'o .ii zo'o loi tanru cu snipa pe'a lei mi degji

mu'o mi'e se ckiku