Has anybody translated it into Lojban?
Omiglot has Article 1 of it. (http://www.omniglot.com/writing/lojban.htm)ro remna cu se jinzi co zifre je simdu'i be le ry. nilselsi'a .e lei ry. selcru .i ry. se menli gi'e se sezmarde .i .ei jeseki'ubo ry. simyzu'e ta'i le tunba
Omiglot has Article 1 of it. (http://www.omniglot.com/writing/lojban.htm)
ro remna cu se jinzi co zifre je simdu'i be le ry. nilselsi'a .e lei ry. selcru .i ry. se menli gi'e se sezmarde .i .ei jeseki'ubo ry. simyzu'e ta'i le tunba
>>543s/Omi/Omni/We ought to have an edit function.
>>543 I think that it should be "[prenu]" rather than "[remna]".
>>543
I think that it should be "[prenu]" rather than "[remna]".
>>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.
>>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
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]".
>>552A "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".
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".
- wakaba 3.0.7 + futaba + futallaby -