Main Menu

Kaltxì

Started by Taronyu, December 28, 2009, 10:16:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Taronyu

As I've noted elsewhere, for all affectionate forms, the final vowel goes to a high vowel. Thus sa'nok becomes sa'nu, and 'eveng becomes 'evi. I think this could be viewed as a phonological derivational rule.

Since I'm really tired of saying kaltxì, as it takes a lot of effort, I'm going to start saying kali.

Does anyone object to this, or have any comments? /i/ is a higher vowel than /ì/, and we've seen that the final consonant can be dropped. And it's a helluva lot easier.

MasterEro

Based on how Frommer created sentence structure in a way that it could be easily varied from person to person, I think that words are intended to be altered in a similar manner. It think its just based on what is acceptable in society, like slang. In english we say "hi" instead of "hello" etc etc. And seeing how it isnt a widely used language, the shortened versions of words to make them less formal are yet to be created, so I think this is a good idea.

Nga txantslusam lu, tsmukan. Eywa ngahu.

Prrntxe

Quote from: Taronyu on December 28, 2009, 10:16:09 AM
As I've noted elsewhere, for all affectionate forms, the final vowel goes to a high vowel. Thus sa'nok becomes sa'nu, and 'eveng becomes 'evi. I think this could be viewed as a phonological derivational rule.

Since I'm really tired of saying kaltxì, as it takes a lot of effort, I'm going to start saying kali.

Does anyone object to this, or have any comments? /i/ is a higher vowel than /ì/, and we've seen that the final consonant can be dropped. And it's a helluva lot easier.

I'd be cautious. What you say makes sense, but we don't know if there's some word kali in the vocab that means something like "sneeze" or "backscratcher" (for example). We also don't know how productive this apparent rule is. For example, the use of "geese" for the plural of "goose" does not lead us to say "meese" for "moose" (except in jest).

Also, I notice that all your examples of this process come from childhood words: "daddy", "mommy", "kid". Maybe it's more an imitation of children's speech than an actual rule?
Oeri Loräkx lu. Fpi ayutral plltxe oe.

Taronyu

Quote from: Prrntxe on December 28, 2009, 03:04:20 PM
Quote from: Taronyu on December 28, 2009, 10:16:09 AM
As I've noted elsewhere, for all affectionate forms, the final vowel goes to a high vowel. Thus sa'nok becomes sa'nu, and 'eveng becomes 'evi. I think this could be viewed as a phonological derivational rule.

Since I'm really tired of saying kaltxì, as it takes a lot of effort, I'm going to start saying kali.

Does anyone object to this, or have any comments? /i/ is a higher vowel than /ì/, and we've seen that the final consonant can be dropped. And it's a helluva lot easier.

I'd be cautious. What you say makes sense, but we don't know if there's some word kali in the vocab that means something like "sneeze" or "backscratcher" (for example). We also don't know how productive this apparent rule is. For example, the use of "geese" for the plural of "goose" does not lead us to say "meese" for "moose" (except in jest).

Also, I notice that all your examples of this process come from childhood words: "daddy", "mommy", "kid". Maybe it's more an imitation of children's speech than an actual rule?

Geese isn't a measure of the productivity of that rule, it's a historical remnant of previous ablaut changes in Old English plurals. The rule is dead. This rule keeps going.

As for children's speech: very valid point. In which case, I'll take it that kali would be cuter. Also, we do need more vocab, but how long should we wait until we can be sure that every possible word doesn't exist?

jiitunary

Wait for Frommer to come back from vacation?

omängum fra'uti

I'd wait until we know everything Dr. Frommer has currently before striking out into uncharted territory, and at that point then we should be cautious what new words get introduced.

A quote from Frommer in his interview with Vanity Fair...

QuoteWould fans help develop it? Is that how it works?

You know, I'm not quite sure how it happened with Klingon. I'm pretty sure it was developed by people beyond the originator. If this ever took off and it got to that point where other people began developing it, that would be great, as long as they did it correctly, within the guidelines of the grammar, of course.

Emphasis on doing it correctly mine.

Since we don't know all the grammar yet, we can't really know if what we are doing is correct within its guidelines.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Taronyu

I agree with you.

This will be my only forfeit. I don't want to spell kaltxì all the time. Although, it's getting easier, haha.