Ke li use

Started by Kemaweyan, March 31, 2011, 10:02:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kemaweyan

I am confused.. I see that many people use ke li with a meaning "not yet" in any sentences. We know that Pawl wrote in his blog this example of ke li:

Quote from: PawlFor the negative, Na'vi doesn't use a separate lexical item like English (already ~ not yet) or French (déjà ~ pas encore) but simply negates li:

  A: Fo li polähem srak?
  'Have they already arrived?'
  B: Ke li.
  'Not yet.'

But I think that this phrase could be used only as a short answer for a questions with li (or if "already" could be added without changing the meaning). The question from Pawl's example also could be just without li and the meaning would be same:

  A: Fo polähem srak?
  Have they arrived?
  B: Ke li.
  Not yet.

In all other cases we should use the word mi with a negation of the verb (example from "Vur Eyavayä"):

  Tsahìk a'ewan mi muntxa ke soli.
  Yong Tsa'hìk did not yet married.

It's just my opinion and I could be wrong, but IMO the sentence Tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa soli is incorrect. Please explain me if I'm mistaken.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Alyara Arati

Oeru txoa livu ma Kemaweyan.  I wanted to say "not yet" rather than "still not" because it sounds much more normal to me in English.  I thought about:

Tsahìk a'ewan muntxa ke li soli. and Tsahìk a'ewan li muntxa ke soli.

But the first example looked all wrong with li between muntxa and soli, and the second seemed to mean "...has already not married." which makes no sense.

Should I stop using ke li for "not yet" until this question is resolved?  I could go back and fix it...
Learn how to see.  Realize that everything connects to everything else.
~ Leonardo da Vinci

Kemaweyan

Actually mi also could mean "yet", not only "still" :) But I'm not sure that your sentence is wrong. That's just IMO.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

wm.annis

Quote from: Kemaweyan on March 31, 2011, 10:02:06 PMIt's just my opinion and I could be wrong, but IMO the sentence Tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa soli is incorrect. Please explain me if I'm mistaken.

I'm pretty sure this is wrong (that is, your doubts, not the example sentence). This pattern, ke li "not already" for the English "not yet", is fairly common among Human languages.  There's no reason to suspect it in Na'vi.

Tswusayona Tsamsiyu

Quote from: Kemaweyan on March 31, 2011, 10:02:06 PM
  A: Fo polähem srak?
  Have they arrived?
  B: Ke li.
  Not yet.
the new question means "have they arrived" in the general sense. it doesn't have to be "have they already arrived". one could also think it's "have they arrived in a time in the past". I think if someone would have asked me that I will answer "yes" or "no". you have to have the "already" there to understand the question, unless it's obvious from the situation.
Nivume Na'vit, fpivìl nìNa'vi, kivame na Na'vi.....
oer fko syaw tswusayona tsamsiyu

Tswusayona Tsamsiyu

I am posting this in another reply since I had no space on the previous one.

Quote from: Kemaweyan on March 31, 2011, 10:02:06 PM
Tsahìk a'ewan mi muntxa ke soli.
Yong Tsa'hìk did not yet married.

It's just my opinion and I could be wrong, but IMO the sentence Tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa soli is incorrect. Please explain me if I'm mistaken.
I don't see anything wrong with ke li in the middle of a sentence. it is used just the way li is used.
when using mi you are telling about a situation that is still happening/ongoing. when using ke li you're talking about an action that hasn't yet happened. so Tsahìk a'ewan mi muntxa ke soli. is "the Tsahìk still isn't married/continues not marrying". he keeps on this situation. to say that he "hasn't yet married" (it just hasn't yet happened) you use "ke li".
Nivume Na'vit, fpivìl nìNa'vi, kivame na Na'vi.....
oer fko syaw tswusayona tsamsiyu

Kamean

I am for double negation. This is an important stylistic feature, and IMHO it shouldn't be neglected.
Tse'a ngal ke'ut a krr fra'uti kame.


Alyara Arati

Quote from: Kamean on April 01, 2011, 10:44:46 AM
I am for double negation. This is an important stylistic feature, and IMHO it shouldn't be neglected.

So:  Tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa ke soli.  Yes?
Learn how to see.  Realize that everything connects to everything else.
~ Leonardo da Vinci

Kamean

Tse'a ngal ke'ut a krr fra'uti kame.


Kemaweyan

Quote from: Alyara Arati on April 01, 2011, 02:58:59 PM
Quote from: Kamean on April 01, 2011, 10:44:46 AM
I am for double negation. This is an important stylistic feature, and IMHO it shouldn't be neglected.

So:  Tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa ke soli.  Yes?


This at least makes sense :) But I still can't understand why use ke li? Tì'efumì oeyä, ke li = mi. This is something like lu letsranten = tsranten. Possible but enough strange :-\
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

wm.annis

Quote from: Kamean on April 01, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
Yes.

No.  There's no reason this would be necessary.  First, he made no effort to give an example of such a construction, which seems like a big oversight if that is the rule.

Second, negating a non-negative adverb (nì- forms, other adverbs and pronouns not having a ke-/kaw- formation) has not previously caused another negative to appear.  For example (from his blog):

  Nga plltxe ke nìfyeyntu ki nì'eveng. You speak not like an adult but a child.

Here the negation of the adverb isn't doubled with another verb negation.

Kemaweyan

Ok. We could ask a question to this sentence:

  Tsahìk a'ewan muntxa soli srak?

and an answer would be "No":

  Tsahìk a'ewan muntxa ke soli.

Now we can add any negative words here (ke li, kawtuhu etc.), but negation of verb does not change. This is the way how double negation appears.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

wm.annis

Someone needs to ask Pawl about this.

Kamean

Tse'a ngal ke'ut a krr fra'uti kame.


Tirea Aean

Sorry for the major bump, but I just ran into this again today when I wanted to say

"I have not yet received an offer."

Do we have confirmation of anything in this thread yet?

Tìtstewan

#15
Hmm.. interesting.

How about this:
kekem li
No action yet
  OR   kekem ke si li
do nothing yet
???
...I was confused by yet vs still. ::)

Anyway, I'm curious too. :)

-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tanri

Oel ke li ke tolel kea stxenut - "I have not yet received an offer."
I don't see any confusion here. Compare with "Oel mi terel 'a'awa stxenut fratrr" - "I am still receiving several offers every day". The "ke li - not yet" versus "mi - still" distinction looks very clear to me.

Quote from: Kemaweyan on April 01, 2011, 03:57:57 PM
Ok. We could ask a question to this sentence:
  Tsahìk a'ewan muntxa soli srak?
and an answer would be "No":
  Tsahìk a'ewan muntxa ke soli.
Now we can add any negative words here (ke li, kawtuhu etc.), but negation of verb does not change. This is the way how double negation appears.
I agree. I even think that "ke li" actually triggers double negation, so if I wanted to say literally "No, young Tsahìk isn't married yet", it should be "Kehe, tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa ke soli", not "Kehe, tsahìk a'ewan ke li muntxa soli".

Kehe! Ke li karyul ke oeyktolìng fìtxeleti ayoer!
     - No! The teacher haven't yet explained this matter to us! (students complaining about exams)
Ayngaru tìkxey, ma eylan oeyä, nga zene ivomum tsat. Fìtìomumìri aynga li nalmume mezìsìtkam, am'aluke!
     - You are wrong, my friends, you have to know that. This knowledge you have already learned two years ago, undoubtedly! (examiner's response)
Tätxawyu akì'ong.

Kemaweyan

Quote from: Tanri on September 17, 2013, 04:38:10 PM
Oel ke li ke tolel kea stxenut - "I have not yet received an offer."
I don't see any confusion here. Compare with "Oel mi terel 'a'awa stxenut fratrr" - "I am still receiving several offers every day". The "ke li - not yet" versus "mi - still" distinction looks very clear to me.

Why are you comparing ke tolel with terel? This difference is clear at all. But what about

 Oel mi ke tolel kea stxenut vs Oel ke li ke tolel kea stxenut

Also I think «not yet» in translation of ke li is a mistake, because there is «<have not> yet» in the sentence. And in languages with double negation we don't use it in such phrases. It seems odd to me. And there is no different between «still» and «yet» in Russian (like mi has both these translations).

Quote from: Tanri on September 17, 2013, 04:38:10 PM
I even think that "ke li" actually triggers double negation

No. ke- or kaw- worlds don't trigger negation of the verb. They just don't change negative meaning of the sentence. So if the sentence is Oe ke tse'a, it already is negative (ke tse'a), then adding ke'ut doesn't change this negation: Oel ke tse'a ke'ut. We say ke tse'a not because there is ke'ut, but because «I don't see». This is canonical double negation in natural languages, I can say it as native speaker. But if there is different «double negation» in Na'vi, then we need an explanation from Pawl...

Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

so right or wrong for each of these?

ke li oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
li oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
ke li oel tolel 'upxaret.

ke mi oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
mi oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
ke mi oel tolel 'upxaret.

I think most of them are not right.


So of course ke li does not trigger a negation of a verb, but can a negated verb be used with ke li?

The question is, What is the actual best way to say:

1. I have not received a message yet.
2. I still have not received a message.
3. I haven't received any messages yet.
4. I still haven't received any messages.

Kemaweyan

Quote from: Tirea Aean on September 18, 2013, 02:56:45 AM
ke li oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
li oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
ke li oel tolel 'upxaret.

ke mi oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
mi oel ke tolel 'upxaret.
ke mi oel tolel 'upxaret.

I'd say mi oel ke tolel 'upxaret...
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D