Is "Canon" still meaningful in Na'vi?

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Well back in the day "Canon" was all-important. The awesome folks here at LN literally looked at language examples and reverse-engineered most of the grammar, just like historians decoding an ancient language. Now, though, Karyu Pawl has been blogging a lot about the language, we have Horen Lì'fyayä leNa'vi, and an official Na'vi dictionary. The Avatar movie's Na'vi, though "canon" in the sense that technically that was the language spoken by the "real" Na'vi, seems outdated at best and error-ridden at most.

The Canon page on the LN Wiki even has pages with sentences that later grammar shows to be erroneous, especially with regards to the ergative case used in modal verb constructions.

Since we are no longer relying on "canon" sentences to infer the grammar of Na'vi, I don't think this concept is nearly as relevant now. Am I correct in assuming this? Why do we still have such pages on the Wiki? The "canon" stuff really stumped me when I first learned Na'vi, since the Wiki the obvious place beginners would want to start. My first impression of Na'vi wasn't that good as a result of looking excessively at the Wiki, and I initially thought Na'vi had no official grammar and everybody was just guessing based on radio transcripts of Frommer talking.

[Tirea Aean]

In the past two days I have started a massive project to edit the Wiki.

The Canon is of COURSE still very important. It is literally the SOURCE of all of our knowledge which is contained in our grammar guides. Up until the blog. And even then, all new rules from there should be added.

Actor error in the film is not Paul's fault. And cases such as *tspìmìyang are rare. Everything is still consistent there, isn't it? Tell me, what Canonical sentences are inconsistent with Canonical grammar?

EDIT: the wiki is ancient. It has existed since the time of the first posts. Before ALL grammar guides we compiled all Corpus and Canon stuff there. Email contact with Frommer was the only way of getting details about grammar. Now, most of the grammar has been defined, and all emails from Frommer are still there. They are law. They are the cornerstone of NiaN and Horen.

The entire point of the Canon pages on the wiki is to store, and cite/reference the source of grammar rules.

DOUBLE EDIT :

especially with regards to the ergative case used in modal verb constructions.

Oh? Where, specifically?

TRIPLE EDIT:

My first impression of Na'vi wasn't that good as a result of looking excessively at the Wiki, and I initially thought Na'vi had no official grammar and everybody was just guessing based on radio transcripts of Frommer talking.

To be honest, that's really how it WAS, in the beginning. And even now, all we have at best are PDFs which contain a compilation of all the information extracted from emails and blog post from Karyu Pawl and conversations with him.

[Blue Elf]

TBH, I didn't used wiki too much, as we have Horen (and even better for me, Czech translation of grammar).
Also, it probably contains some errors now - at least regarding modal construction.

But what I'm really uncomfortable with are these records:
http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Verb_syntax#Transitivity

ambivalent transitivity, as in the verb pey, which can mean either wait (intransitive) or await, wait for (transitive)

http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Canon#Verb_Phrases_as_Objects

(1) Oel new pivlltxe nìNa'vi mì oeyä letrra tìrey, (2) slä oel tsun pivey (3) trrit a ngat taying (oe new tìying!) ayoe nì'ul aylì'u!

http://forum.learnnavi.org/language-updates/wait-a-minute-pey-is-intransitive/ (not part of cannon; shouldn't it be?)
All these say something completely different about pey transitivity. What one should believe? Fortunately we have dictionary, which confirms that pey is intransitive, but if wiki contains such incorect information, why should one read it and learn using it?
From this viewpoint canon works more like historical view of language - you can see what time some rule was valid, but you can't be sure if it still is
Correcting wiki is good idea - thanks for your work, ma Tirea and etrìpa syayvi!

[Tirea Aean]

TBH, I didn't used wiki too much, as we have Horen (and even better for me, Czech translation of grammar).

Me either to be honest. I have only used it mainly to provide source citation when making corrections.

But what I'm really uncomfortable with are these records:

Oh wow. Hmmmm

http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Verb_syntax#Transitivity

ambivalent transitivity, as in the verb pey, which can mean either wait (intransitive) or await, wait for (transitive)

^ This is not canon and should be edited. It was written ages ago by a member of LN.

http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Canon#Verb_Phrases_as_Objects

(1) Oel new pivlltxe nìNa'vi mì oeyä letrra tìrey, (2) slä oel tsun pivey (3) trrit a ngat taying (oe new tìying!) ayoe nì'ul aylì'u!

^ The focus here is not pey. I think that here, K. Pawl completely didn't even consider *"pey trrit" to call it out. He never made mention of it. When I read this, I never considered it to be an explicit endorsement of using pey transitively. Which is why I asked Pawl. And I got the following explicit information regarding transition it of pey, which had always been assumed by the community.

http://forum.learnnavi.org/language-updates/wait-a-minute-pey-is-intransitive/ (not part of cannon; shouldn't it be?)

Which should be added to the canon page and will be.

All these say something completely different about pey transitivity. What one should believe?

The latest, canon, explicit confirmation which is in my thread.

Fortunately we have dictionary, which confirms that pey is intransitive,

The only reason the dictionary says that is because after the latest explicit confirmation, I edited it from v. to vin.

but if wiki contains such incorect information, why should one read it and learn using it?

This is why I aw going to make contributions to edit it for accuracy and reflect current known information.

From this viewpoint canon works more like historical view of language - you can see what time some rule was valid, but you can't be sure if it still is

And this. But I want to make it so it is known what is valid. Most inconsistencies arise from community assumptions which end up being wrong. ^^

Correcting wiki is good idea - thanks for your work, ma Tirea and etrìpa syayvi!

Irayo

[wm.annis]

The Wiki Canon pages are still utterly vital.  They are so important to my work on the Horen that I take a backup of it weekly.  There are many links from the Horen to Canon wiki pages.  A few times Paul has asked me if he has remembered to pass on some piece of grammar or vocabulary, and I have more than once been able to point him to the correct Canon entry to answer his question.  Nearly everything he has said about the language before he started the blog (and even the occasional later tidbit) are there.  They should not go away.

Now, the other sections of the wiki discussing grammar might not be useful.  At the very least, it might be good to put a banner on the top of all those pointing people to more recent stuff, if we don't want to just delete them.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Maybe the original wiki should be preserved somewhere to show how far we've come 'since the time of the first songs'.

[Niri Te]

I am glad that Karyu Firearm Aean is willing to do this,  with my brain injuries,  it is tough enough for me to learn a new word,  or rule of grammar ONCE. If what I learner was wrong,  and I have to UNLEARN it first,  and then relearned the correct way,  it takes me WEEKS,  if ever to switch.

[Tirea Aean]

Maybe the original wiki should be preserved somewhere to show how far we've come 'since the time of the first songs'.

Wm.annis has weekly backups.

The Wiki Canon pages are still utterly vital.  They are so important to my work on the Horen that I take a backup of it weekly. 

EDIT: Unless you mean the WHOLE Wiki... I think Okrìsti does that.

[wm.annis]

Unless you mean the WHOLE Wiki... I think Okrìsti does that.

Nope, just the Corpus and Canon pages.  The rest is recoverable from other sources.