Deuteronomy 12:2

Started by Eltu Lefngap Makto, December 17, 2011, 10:30:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Eltu Lefngap Makto

Comparing this with last year, it looks like I have 2 more posts to go for my wintertime streak!  :P

This is is a very heated verse in its original context, so here is a heated, in-world translation:


Destroy completely all the places where the nations you are driving out worship their gods—on the high mountains, on the hills, and under every flourishing tree.

Nìwotz skiva'a ayngal fratseng futa feyä Eywat kìte'e solängi ayolo'ìl a 'eraku, alu sìn ayRam aLusìng sì sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo 'usonga frautral.

May y'all completely destroy everywhere that the clans which (y'all) are removing serve (boo!) their Eywa, that is on the Floating Mountains, on every hill and under every blooming tree.

I was going to translate their next verse, but I think this'll be controversial enough, without me taking about about burning down ayVitrayä Ramunong, cutting down Vitrautral, smashing ayrel aswok and chopping down Utral Aymokriyä. :o
'Ivong, Na'vi!

Tirea Aean

#1
oh wow. this really IS an interesting verse to post here. xD I got yo back tho.


Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengit a ayolo' a ayngal kerurakx
kìte'e si feyä ayeywaru alu sìn kxayla ayram,
sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo frautral a'usong.

Eltu Lefngap Makto

Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 17, 2011, 11:39:52 PM
oh wow. this really IS an interesting verse to post here. xD I got yo back tho.

Irayo!  Oe lu ke nì'awtu!

Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 17, 2011, 11:39:52 PM
Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengit a ayolo' a ayngal kerurakx
kìte'e si feyä ayeywaru alu sìn kxayla ayram,
sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo frautral a'usong.
Can fko have two a's so close together?!  'looks odd.
I think I am missing something about Na'vi: do fko not like to have plurals with fra-?  e.g. fratsenge (everywhere) as opposed to fraysenge (all places)?

Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengit a ayolo' a ayngal kerurakx
kìte'e sängi feyä Eywaru alu sìn kxayla ayram,
sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo 'usong afrautral.
'Ivong, Na'vi!

Tirea Aean

#3
Quote from: Eltu Lefngap Makto on December 18, 2011, 02:49:01 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 17, 2011, 11:39:52 PM
oh wow. this really IS an interesting verse to post here. xD I got yo back tho.

Irayo!  Oe ke lu nì'awtu!

Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 17, 2011, 11:39:52 PM
Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengit a ayolo' a ayngal kerurakx
kìte'e si feyä ayeywaru alu sìn kxayla ayram,
sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo frautral a'usong.
Can fko have two a's so close together?!  'looks odd.

yes. The intentional breakdown is:

Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengita{ ayolo'a{ ayngal kerurakx} kìte'e sängi feyä eywaru}

Quote
I think I am missing something about Na'vi: do fko not like to have plurals with fra-?  e.g. fratsenge (everywhere) as opposed to fraysenge (all places)?

right. fratseng basically means (Each and) Every (Single) place. I can't recall a time where fra is put on a pluralized noun.

Quote
Nìwotx skiva'a fratsengit a ayolo' a ayngal kerurakx
kìte'e sängi feyä Eywaru alu sìn kxayla ayram,
sìn ayramtsyìp sì äo 'usong afrautral.


I can agree with kìte'e sängi (oh and I see what you did there with ayram alusìng, wasn't trying to spoil the sport. I didn't notice you did that. don't know how i missed it. I don't really care if you put it like that or not. if anything it's more fun XD

Eywaru, sure whatever.

yeah, the many vowels together causing epic flow. I love it.  8)  ;)

`Eylan Ayfalulukanä

Very interesting lesson in attribution! (Something I still weak in.)

I also agree with TA that fratseng is the correct form you want. There are places where fraytseng might work (if {b]fray+[/b] is a legal form, see your other thread on this subject), but certainly not here.

Lastly, you have *Nìwotz instead of Nìwotx in your first version of that post. Not a real word in Na'vi, but cool nonetheless!

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

Tirea Aean


`Eylan Ayfalulukanä

Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 19, 2011, 03:37:14 PM
Fraytseng does not exist.

If you look at section 2.3.1 of the reference grammar, we find there:

2.3.1. Vowel Contraction. Since identical vowelsmay not occur next to each other, a few gram-
matical processes involve a doubled vowel reducing to just one.

2.3.1.3. When the prenoun prefixes end in the same vowel the following word starts with, they
reduce to one, as in tsatan < tsa- + atan, fìlva < fì- + ìlva (§3.3.6).  Wiki (18/5/2011)

So, based on these rules, fraytseng is the more likely correct construction, thus the pink note in section 3.3.4.

3.3.4. Fra-. This prenoun means all, every. When it is followed by the plural prefix ay+ they contract into fray+.

However, based on an interpretation of another rule in section 2.3.1

2.3.1.4. Contraction does not occur for indefinite -o or enclitic adpositions.When two identical
vowels occur next to each other, they are written with a hyphen between them, fya'o-o some-
way, zekwä-äo under a finger.

We may be able to get away with writing fra-aytseng, as the prenoun is enclitic. However, fray+ is more in keeping with the rules.

Still though, fratseng is fully adequate for use in the context of this verse.

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

Tirea Aean

#7
Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on December 21, 2011, 12:07:16 AM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 19, 2011, 03:37:14 PM
Fraytseng does not exist.

If you look at section 2.3.1 of the reference grammar, we find there:

2.3.1. Vowel Contraction. Since identical vowelsmay not occur next to each other, a few gram-
matical processes involve a doubled vowel reducing to just one.

2.3.1.3. When the prenoun prefixes end in the same vowel the following word starts with, they
reduce to one, as in tsatan < tsa- + atan, fìlva < fì- + ìlva (§3.3.6).  Wiki (18/5/2011)

So, based on these rules, fraytseng is the more likely correct construction, thus the pink note in section 3.3.4.

3.3.4. Fra-. This prenoun means all, every. When it is followed by the plural prefix ay+ they contract into fray+.

However, based on an interpretation of another rule in section 2.3.1

2.3.1.4. Contraction does not occur for indefinite -o or enclitic adpositions.When two identical
vowels occur next to each other, they are written with a hyphen between them, fya'o-o some-
way, zekwä-äo under a finger.

We may be able to get away with writing fra-aytseng, as the prenoun is enclitic. However, fray+ is more in keeping with the rules.


I understand where "fray" came from. But I still am not convinced it exists until that statement (which you put in red) is NOT maroon in the grammar:

Quote
Text in maroon is for matters that seem to me to be serious questions about the language but
for which no answer is currently available. Some will require simply confirmation from Frommer,
others will require much deeper thought and work on his part
. This grammar aspires to someday
be maroon-free.

also, even if it does exist, it would be frayseng. ("fray+" would cause lenition because ay+ does.)

also, 2.3.1.4 is talking about suffixes: the -o suffix and enclitic ADPOSITIONS, which fra- is a prefix. an enclitic adposition is an adposition which is used as a suffix.

Quote
Still though, fratseng is fully adequate for use in the context of this verse.

Agreed.

`Eylan Ayfalulukanä

Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 21, 2011, 07:29:44 AM

I understand where "fray" came from. But I still am not convinced it exists until that statement (which you put in red) is NOT maroon in the grammar:

I guess maroon looked pink to me, and pink text is very hard to read against the gray background. So, I used red. But you got the point.

Quote from: Tirea Aean
also, even if it does exist, it would be frayseng. ("fray+" would cause lenition because ay+ does.)

My bad  :'(

Quote from: Tirea Aean
also, 2.3.1.4 is talking about suffixes: the -o suffix and enclitic ADPOSITIONS, which fra- is a prefix. an enclitic adposition is an adposition which is used as a suffix.

I should have elaborated a little more on that. I did see that 2.3.1.4 was for enclitic adpositions, which always occur at the end of a word in Na'vi. But if I understand properly what enclitic means, it would be used to describe a bound prefix as well. Although not specifically applying to the case we have been exploring here, the general principle of avoiding vowel doubling, I think would apply here as well.

Quote from: Tirea Aean
Still though, fratseng is fully adequate for use in the context of this verse.

Agreed.

frafì'u lu fpom  :)

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

Tirea Aean

#9
Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on December 21, 2011, 03:27:24 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on December 21, 2011, 07:29:44 AM

I understand where "fray" came from. But I still am not convinced it exists until that statement (which you put in red) is NOT maroon in the grammar:

I guess maroon looked pink to me, and pink text is very hard to read against the gray background. So, I used red. But you got the point.

Yeah, I get the point. It's just that red print around here means big business. (maroon/pink print in the guide not so much; it stands for grey areas)

Quote
Quote from: Tirea Aean
also, even if it does exist, it would be frayseng. ("fray+" would cause lenition because ay+ does.)

My bad  :'(

No need to tsngawvìk ma 'eylan.
Quote from: Omängum fra'utiNo one expects the Na'vi lenition!

Quote
Quote from: Tirea Aean
also, 2.3.1.4 is talking about suffixes: the -o suffix and enclitic ADPOSITIONS, which fra- is a prefix. an enclitic adposition is an adposition which is used as a suffix.

I should have elaborated a little more on that. I did see that 2.3.1.4 was for enclitic adpositions, which always occur at the end of a word in Na'vi. But if I understand properly what enclitic means, it would be used to describe a bound prefix as well. Although not specifically applying to the case we have been exploring here, the general principle of avoiding vowel doubling, I think would apply here as well.

2.3.1.4 specifically says

Quote from: http://www.learnnavi.org/docs/horen-lenavi.pdf
Contraction does not occur for indefinite -o or enclitic adpositions. When two identical
vowels occur next to each other, they are written with a hyphen between them, fya'o-o some
way, zekwä-äo under a finger.

it says that instead of a vowel merge (contraction) when an adpostion attached to the end of a word that ends in the same vowel the adposition starts with, a hyphen (-) is used to keep the words intact.

it never says anything about prefixes. in fact, you already quoted the rule that says that vowels merge when prefixes cause two of the same vowel to be consecutive:

Quote from: http://www.learnnavi.org/docs/horen-lenavi.pdf
2.3.1.3. When the prenoun prefixes end in the same vowel the following word starts with, they
reduce to one, as in tsatan < tsa- + atan, fìlva < fì- + ìlva (§3.3.6).  Wiki (18/5/2011)

This says that prefixes ending in the same vowel a noun starts with cause a vowel contraction.

Quote
Quote from: Tirea Aean
Still though, fratseng is fully adequate for use in the context of this verse.

Agreed.

frafì'u lu fpom  :)

frafì'u? That seems strange. why not fra'u? (I've never seen fra-fì- used before.)