Sì'eyng a ftu Na'rìng #2: The rest of the Top 7

[Lance R. Casey]

Here follow the answers to the rest of the "Top 7" of the Outstanding Questions, as numbered in the PDF accessible here. (Frommerian examples are here marked with blue.)


Asking/giving permission (#5)

As suggested, tsun can work for both. So, for example:

   – Tsun oe kivä srak?
   – Srane, nga tsun kivä.

It is also possible that tung allow might be used in such cases, but the details of that, including the full syntactic environment of the verb itself, are under consideration, so just stick to tsun for now.


Phonological questions (#6a)

• Final stops are released if followed by a vowel in the flow of speech (i.e. not at the end of sentences, before pauses etc.). In other words, the underlined t would be released in sentence #1 below, but not in #2:
  
     1. Pot oel tse'a.
     2. Oel tse'a yerikit. Oeru tìng oeyä tskot.
  
  
• The sequence äa is allowed and does not decay (e.g. kinäa zìsìt seven years). The reverse aä is more unlikely to occur since the genitive suffix for words ending in a is -yä, but it would also be fine. Also, from the infixed verb veykrreiyìn cause to be overwhelmed (woo!) in a recent Na'viteri post, *iì is apparently unstable enough to be prevented.
• Na'vi does not have double or long vowels naturally, but they can arise as the result of affixing. In writing, this is marked with a hyphen: oe-eo before me, zekwä-äo under the finger, fya'o-o some way
• In the known phrase fìskxawngìri tsap'alute sengi oe, the form of the auxiliary verb si is not an error, but a variant. Specifically, when the pejorative affect infix ‹äng› is followed by the vowel i, it may (NB: not must) be shifted to ‹eng›.

Synonyms (#6b)

For the five provided examples, we got this:

• na vs. pxel (like, as): These are synonyms, but na is more common.
• hawnu vs. tìhawnu si (protect): The difference between these is one of syntax, not semantics. That is, they mean the same, but are used differently in a sentence: the first is a transitive verb, whereas the second, being a si-construction, is treated as intransitive with the recipient of the action in the dative case.
• nìn vs. tìng nari (look): Nìn is a transitive verb that is typically used with a direct object: "look at", but not with the ongoing connotation of "watch"; more "turn your attention to that right now". Tìng nari is intransitive as per above. Also, for a simple "look at that", tsat nìn would be more likely than tsaru tìng nari (and it's shorter too).
• way vs. tìrol (song): Way refers to ancient or ceremonial songs, whereas tìrol is more general, but it only refers to vocal songs, not instrumental ones, as one might expect from the derivation (rol sing). We also got a tentative yes on the verb way si, which would be to "sing a way".
• kin vs. X-ru lu tìkin (need): Here there is a clear division of meaning and use. Kin is a transitive verb that is used to say "I need this thing", whereas the dative construction with tìkin is used for "I need to do this". Examples:
  
     Oel kin syuvet fte rivey I need food to live
     Awngaru lu tìkin a nume nì'ul We need to learn more ("We have the need. What need? The learning-more need.")
  
  So, to say "X needs to Y", use the pattern X-ru lu tìkin a Y. If X is omitted, the sentence becomes impersonal ("there is a need that I finish cooking by 5 PM").

[Kemaweyan]

Irayo

['Oma Tirea]

Really fascinating info.  With nìn/tìng nari, I thought the difference would be similar to why stawm/tìng mikyun in different.

I also see why the odd-ish constructions: much ado teri verb transitivity.

...and W O U   "na" and "pxel" are actually synonymous, with absolutely no distinguishing factor.


As for the stops, it is a real curiosity that they are released in such a position in flowing speech, especially considering this example from the movie: {pot̚ zamuŋɛ}.  I am also curious as to whether or not they are released in formal speech (I would suspect not...).

[Kì'eyawn]

As for the stops, it is a real curiosity that they are released in such a position in flowing speech, especially considering this example from the movie: {pot̚ zamuŋɛ}.  I am also curious as to whether or not they are released in formal speech (I would suspect not...).

From a discussion had (i think) around the dinner table, i got that one doesn't really speak of glottal stops being released or unreleased.  When you get to a glottal stop, you stop.  When that stop is followed by a vowel, it's heard very clearly; but when it's followed by another consonant, it's more difficult to distinguish.

Ngaytxoa if i misunderstood, ma smuktu.

['Oma Tirea]

... speak of glottal stops being released or unreleased...

...but I'm also talking about all four of the non-ejective stops here: {p}, {t}, {k}, {ʔ}.  My question concerns whether or not they are released between words in the same sentence for formal speech, e.g. the T in "yerikit oel tspang".

[Kì'eyawn]

Tam, tslolam.

Hmm...  I'd say it depends on how slowly you're speaking.  The more you slow down, the less likely you are to elide things together.

I can tell you that, for us ayskxawng at the meeting this weekend, i sometimes deliberately used the long forms of case endings to make myself more easily understood.  It's possible more formal speech defaults to long forms.

['Oma Tirea]

...and how about when you have to use the long case marking "-it"?  See sentence above again...

...or, if the sentence were simply "yerik lu po", what would happen to the K in formal speech?

[NeotrekkerZ]

Oel kin syuvet fte rivey I need food to live
Awngaru lu tìkin a nume nì'ul We need to learn more

Did you happen to find out which form to use if you wanted to say something like We need you to learn more?  I'm guessing it's the 2nd one, but I want to make sure.

[Lance R. Casey]

Oel kin syuvet fte rivey I need food to live
Awngaru lu tìkin a nume nì'ul We need to learn more

Did you happen to find out which form to use if you wanted to say something like We need you to learn more?  I'm guessing it's the 2nd one, but I want to make sure.

Not explicitly, but kin as a modal verb (*oe kin kivä) was ruled out, and its scope restricted to objects:

If you wanna say "I need to go", you can't just use the verb kin. You have to say lu oeru tìkin a.

[Ftiafpi]

The released stops is so excellent and totally unexpected. It makes a lot of sense though and I like it a lot, really makes it easier to speak fluidly.

[Nyx]

Thanks for this update, interesting stuff

[Plumps]

Eltur tìtxen si, ma Lance... irayo

Alright, if way is traditional and tìrol is vocal only, do we expect to be there yet another word that would include vocal and instrumental music?

[Kì'eyawn]

Eltur tìtxen si, ma Lance... irayo

Alright, if way is traditional and tìrol is vocal only, do we expect to be there yet another word that would include vocal and instrumental music?

The question of instrumental music did come up.  For now, we know that pamtseo can refer to any kind of music; as for an actual "song" with no sung component, we don't have a word—yet.

[Plumps]

Hìtxoa, but I seem to have an ekxan in my brain, today ...
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the definitions here, ma Lawren... So, please, help me out if you can. Take, Leona Lewis' "I see you" for example ... it's pamtseo, that much is clear. It's not a way because it was composed in the not-so-distant past. But the way, I understand it, it can't be tìrol now, because it's not only instrumental but it is sung as well ...

[Kì'eyawn]

Ma Plumps, i'm not sure that it can't be a tìrol...  A tìrol has to be sung at least, but i don't know that it must be sung only—does that make sense?

Taronyu may have a more definitive answer, but this is my feeling.

[Prrton]

Ma Plumps, i'm not sure that it can't be a tìrol...  A tìrol has to be sung at least, but i don't know that it must be sung only—does that make sense?

Taronyu may have a more definitive answer, but this is my feeling.

Tì'efumì oeyä lu tsa'u tìpawmluke lawa tìkenong tìrolä.*

['Oma Tirea]

The released stops is so excellent and totally unexpected. It makes a lot of sense though and I like it a lot, really makes it easier to speak fluidly.

...and in slower formalized speech?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Tirea Aean]

The released stops is so excellent and totally unexpected. It makes a lot of sense though and I like it a lot, really makes it easier to speak fluidly.

...and in slower formalized speech?!?!?!?!?!?!?

what do you THINK happens. most likely the unreleasedness comes back. wow.

EDIT: not meant as harsh as it sounds, like the quote which it is a response to

['Oma Tirea]

The released stops is so excellent and totally unexpected. It makes a lot of sense though and I like it a lot, really makes it easier to speak fluidly.

...and in slower formalized speech?!?!?!?!?!?!?

what do you THINK happens. most likely the unreleasedness comes back. wow.

Irayo.  Even a with simple answer like that, oe mivawey.

[Tirea Aean]

The released stops is so excellent and totally unexpected. It makes a lot of sense though and I like it a lot, really makes it easier to speak fluidly.

...and in slower formalized speech?!?!?!?!?!?!?

what do you THINK happens. most likely the unreleasedness comes back. wow.

Irayo.  Even a with simple answer like that, oe mivawey.

ok that was mean. Tsari tsap'alute.

what i really mean to say is: Tì'efumì oeyä,

logic tells me that if the unreleased goes away for sake of flow and fast-speech phenomenon, then it will come back when deliberately trying to be slow and clear.

we were talking at the ultxa sometime about people learning English as second langauge and stuff like shoulda coulda woulda gonna and how they are results of fast speech and flow, where as if you were to be clear you would say should have, could have, would have, going to, etc. not sure the relevance, but just my eighth of a cent.