Author Topic: Our Dictionary  (Read 93996 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Fyawìntxu

  • Tawtute
  • *
  • Posts: 53
  • Karma: 0
Re: Our Dictionary
« Reply #260 on: January 24, 2010, 06:12:52 pm »
   kaltxì ma smuktu!

   hmmm always good to read what has been said before... so we don't repeat again and again the same things... things that competent people (not me, but linguists here) talked about. Please feel welcome to complete their discussion and/or bring new ideas, that what we all need and expect to develop the community.
 
   But arriving saying "I'm new, don't know if this as been said before, but..." sounds little wrong.

   "sharing infos" vs "showing off"? not against anybody particular, but a feeling I sometimes get reading around.

   I personaly take time to read the whole conversations, in order to help the community in the best way, to give answers sometimes, rarely, or just bring elements, for us to answer together.

   Each member is supposed to serve the Community. That's my feeling, that's the teaching of Avatar, and of Na'vi life style.

  Eywa ayngahu ma smuk.

Fyawìntxu
Eywa ayngahu ma smuk!

Offline Taronyu

  • Meals on wheels
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 2714
  • Karma: 154
  • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
    • Burnt Fen
Re: Our Dictionary
« Reply #261 on: January 25, 2010, 02:10:50 am »
a The definition "pn. which, that" seems a bit shallow to me. How about a more strict mention of subordination?
It's the Guide definition. I decided early on not to give full grammatical help with words. That's what reading grammars gives you. This is more of a lexicon.

atokirina'
The last syllable is underlined, but in the movie Neytiri clearly stresses the penultimate one several times (with a lateral realization of the flap). This should(?) also be enough to mark the stress in rina'.
And yet Frommer gave us this stress. Neytiri is wrong. I've brought this point up before. Marking two syllables for stress is a no go.

ean
Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.

'ewan
Wrong section (should be under apostrophe).
Fixed. See above. May not have uploaded that, yet, I had some other stuff I wanted to check first.

  • fahew
    Should be noun, not verb (oeri ta peyä fahew akewong ontu teya längu).
Fixed.

ftia
Verb (ft<ol>ia in Norm's line).
Could also be a noun.

fyape
I think (interrogative) adverb is more accurate than conjunction for this. Also, the use of the word "allomorph" in this entry as well as those of the other pe+-modified words seems inaccurate to me, seeing as how these are not single morphemes, but words consisting of two different morphemes. "Variant" or "variant form" fits better.
Since the change occurs in a specific place, i don't think allomorph is the worst word. I don't like the term variant. We're working on re-classifying these.

hapxì
Noun (Na'viyä luyu hapxì).
See above.

kehe/srane
How about calling these interjections?
They're not emotive.

nì'aw
Adverb, not adjective.
Could be either. Removed pos.

nì'it
Adverb, not noun: "a little, slightly".
That's not the definition we were given. Going to keep this as a noun.

-ri
What evidence is there for calling this an adposition? Isn't it just a suffix?
Changed rule for a lot of these to affix.

rutxe
This can't be a verb given how it's used (spivaw oeti rutxe, ma oeyä eylan); I suggest particle instead.
Good call.

san/sìk
The first is classified as a noun and the second as a verb, whereas I think they are in fact correlative particles (one of which can be dropped at either end of the sentence as per WP).
Changed to part.

tìfyawìntxu
"Guidance", not "guide".
Guide, not guidance. You been FROMMERED.

tsìvol
Repetition of "thirty-two".
Changed.

txele
Noun, not verb.
Changed.

yawne
Adjective, not noun.
Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.

z<er>a'u
Why does this have its own entry?
I had this as separate to note the change in syllabicity. However, seeing as how we now have an official rule on the subject, I have removed this.

Additions
  • trram
    "yesterday" (attested in adverbial function)
  • -ur
    allomorph of -ru and -r (from the recent letter)
  • I don't know how many "si-verbs" you want to include as such, but other attested ones are tìkangkem si "work" and tsap'alute si "apologize".
Sources? Trying not to list +si words, unless they're given in the guide.

More generally, I note with some surprise that i and ì are treated as the same letter in the lists, as are a and ä. This is flat-out wrong, obviously, but supposedly due to automatic sorting of some kind. Finally, a number of ìs have somehow gone missing from the changelog entry for v7, at least in my reader.
It's not flat out wrong. It's an editorial decision designed to help the english reader. Given the small amount of ì and ä words, I didn't want to put them in their own section. Read the earlier parts of this thread. Not changing it, either. As for the lack of ì's in the changelog: that's made for people who have to edit the source code, so I don't really care. I change them when I note them.

Removed version 6 changlog, appended it to first post here. Updated. 7.034 is the current version. [/list]
« Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 02:25:15 am by Taronyu »

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Our Dictionary
« Reply #262 on: January 25, 2010, 02:25:51 am »
    ean
    Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
    But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.

    Where do we have any evidence of any words filling more than one part of speech like that?

    Quote
    tìfyawìntxu
    "Guidance", not "guide".[/li][/list]
    Guide, not guidance. You been FROMMERED.

    tìfyawìntxuri oeyä
    my guidance

    ayngaru fyawivìntxu
    to guide you

    Who's been frommered?

    Quote
    yawne
    Adjective, not noun.
    Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.
    Where do you get that he implied it's a noun?  Beloved in English is primarily an adjective.

    Quote
    Trying not to list +si words, unless they're given in the guide.
    I think mostly it makes sense to list +si words when they are at least partly idiomic, such as nari si or eltu si.  I wouldn't consider "work" or "apologize" to be terribly idiomic, they are pretty straight forward in meaning.  (Yes, I'm agreeing with you on this comment rather than disagreeing.)
    « Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 02:57:41 am by omängum fra'uti »
    Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
    Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

    Offline suomichris

    • Omatikaya
    • ****
    • Posts: 475
    • Karma: 13
    Re: Our Dictionary
    « Reply #263 on: January 25, 2010, 02:27:13 am »
    One notes that the dictionary lists "lok" as a preposition, but we (also?) appear to have it as a verb, as "livok" shows up in the bit Frommer read for the NYT...

    Offline roger

    • Taronyu
    • ****
    • Posts: 724
    • Karma: 22
    Re: Our Dictionary
    « Reply #264 on: January 25, 2010, 02:30:21 am »
    ean
    Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
    But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.
    If we have it attested as both adj and noun, shouldn't we state that?
    ftia
    Verb (ft<ol>ia in Norm's line).
    Could also be a noun.
    ditto, noun & verb
    nì'aw
    Adverb, not adjective.
    Could be either. Removed pos.
    ditto, adj & adv
    nì'it
    Adverb, not noun: "a little, slightly".
    That's not the definition we were given. Going to keep this as a noun.
    The def. seems ambiguous to me: in "I ran a little bit", the phrase "a little bit" functions as an adverb, not as a noun, which would require that run be transitive. Not sure we should specify part of speech.
    yawne
    Adjective, not noun.
    Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.
    It's not clear from Frommer. He says, "yawne means 'beloved.' (For the noun, the e has dropped. Happens a lot.)" That at least implies that "yawne" is not a noun. Do we have oeyä yawne ?

    Offline omängum fra'uti

    • Moderator Emeritus
    • Palulukan Makto
    • *****
    • *
    • Posts: 3804
    • Karma: 127
    • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
      • Pronounced Na'vi words
    Re: Our Dictionary
    « Reply #265 on: January 25, 2010, 03:00:29 am »
    Where do we have "ean" attested as a noun, "ftia" as a noun, or "nì'aw" as an adjective?  I'm also inclined to believe that "nì'it" is an adverb, as it's just nì + 'it, implying the adverbial form of 'it.
    Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
    Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

    Offline Lance R. Casey

    • Ikran Makto
    • *****
    • *
    • Posts: 948
    • se Sweden
    • Karma: 57
    • Man cenuva métim' andúnë?
    Re: Our Dictionary
    « Reply #266 on: January 25, 2010, 03:34:19 am »
    Fyawìntxu:
    If you got that feeling from me, I do apologize, and the blame is mine. Oeru txoa livu.
    My purpose was (is) not to "show off", but to help by way of offering my thoughts and possibly insights. The list above is what occurred to me while going through the dictionary for another project.

    As for what's come before, I have read this thread, but it is a long one, and there have been many corrections and amendments along the way, and I simply do not trust myself to remember them all. There are also many other threads around the forum in which relevant stuff may have been discussed that I have missed. Hence the caveat. It was meant more as "I think this is new, but in case I'm wrong I apologize in advance" and I will gladly accept a simple dismissal along the lines of "this has been dealt with before".


    a The definition "pn. which, that" seems a bit shallow to me. How about a more strict mention of subordination?
    It's the Guide definition. I decided early on not to give full grammatical help with words. That's what reading grammars gives you. This is more of a lexicon.
    Very well.

    atokirina'
    The last syllable is underlined, but in the movie Neytiri clearly stresses the penultimate one several times (with a lateral realization of the flap). This should(?) also be enough to mark the stress in rina'.
    And yet Frommer gave us this stress. Neytiri is wrong. I've brought this point up before. Marking two syllables for stress is a no go.
    Ah, ok.

    ean
    Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
    But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.
    There is also rim yellow which is marked as an adjective. Is there a more explicit source for this? (NB: I am not in possession of SG)
    But, generally, why not classify confirmed words with what we know for the time being, and add to this when/if new information occurs? Ean is demonstrably an adjective, even though it might be something else as well.

    ftia
    Verb (ft<ol>ia in Norm's line).
    Could also be a noun.
    See above.

    kehe/srane
    How about calling these interjections?
    They're not emotive.
    Particles, then? Not trying to push the point, just making classification suggestions. (On that note: do we need to classify everything explicitly?)

    nì'aw
    Adverb, not adjective.
    Could be either. Removed pos.

    nì'it
    Adverb, not noun: "a little, slightly".
    That's not the definition we were given. Going to keep this as a noun.
    For these, I'v gone by the prefix nì-, which is adverbial in nature. Is there evidence for a non-adverbial function?
    We do have Pxan livu txo nì’aw oe ngari Only if I am worthy of you, where nì'aw functions adverbially. I suppose it comes down to the classification issue mentioned above again.

    tìfyawìntxu
    "Guidance", not "guide".
    Guide, not guidance. You been FROMMERED.
    As omängum fra'uti said, Frommer's letter (in response to Ma Sempul) has tìfyawìntxuri oeyä my guidance. Have there been follow-ups?
    To me "guide" suggests the nomen agentis of fyawìntxu, unless we're talking about a more abstract concept as in "pocket guide".

    yawne
    Adjective, not noun.
    Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.
    Where did he say that? We have nga yawne lu oer I love you (non-lit.), which to me suggests adjectival function -- why not nga yawne oeyä lu otherwise? Also, I think the existence of the nominalized tìyawn strongly suggests that the root word is not a noun.

    Additions
    • trram
      "yesterday" (attested in adverbial function)
    • -ur
      allomorph of -ru and -r (from the recent letter)
    • I don't know how many "si-verbs" you want to include as such, but other attested ones are tìkangkem si "work" and tsap'alute si "apologize".
    Sources? Trying not to list +si words, unless they're given in the guide.
    Trram is from that audio clip at New York Times. Granted, it is a transcription, but listening to Frommer's pronunciation I'd say it's a correct one. I won't argue the point, however.
    -ur is attested in the letter: Ayeylanur oeyä sì eylanur lì'fyayä leNa'vi nìwotx To all my friends and friends of the Na'vi language
    Tìkangkem si is too, whereas tsap'alute si is from here, albeit with a problematic infix. Now, my point in bringing these up was to see what plan you're employing with these compound verbs -- apparently they can arise from pretty much whatever, so listing every possible combination is meaningless, but one way of dealing with it is to only include those that have shown up in canon material. Either way is fine by me.

    More generally, I note with some surprise that i and ì are treated as the same letter in the lists, as are a and ä. This is flat-out wrong, obviously, but supposedly due to automatic sorting of some kind. Finally, a number of ìs have somehow gone missing from the changelog entry for v7, at least in my reader.
    It's not flat out wrong. It's an editorial decision designed to help the english reader. Given the small amount of ì and ä words, I didn't want to put them in their own section. Read the earlier parts of this thread. Not changing it, either. As for the lack of ì's in the changelog: that's made for people who have to edit the source code, so I don't really care. I change them when I note them.
    I struggled with that wording, being afraid that it would come across as harsh or cocky, but in the end decided to keep it. Bad call, I think.
    Anyway, my point is that they are different letters -- and more importantly, different phonemes -- and I have a slight concern that grouping them might be somewhat detrimental to students, as it could weaken this distinction. However, I accept the editorial decision. (Question: is it subject to change in the event we get more relevant words?)

    // Lance R. Casey

    Offline Taronyu

    • Meals on wheels
    • Olo'eyktan Anawm
    • Palulukan Makto
    • *****
    • *
    • Posts: 2714
    • Karma: 154
    • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
      • Burnt Fen
    Re: Our Dictionary
    « Reply #267 on: January 25, 2010, 04:12:54 am »
    That's what I get for answering while having a hangover. Right. Answer time.

      ean
      Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
      But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.

      Where do we have any evidence of any words filling more than one part of speech like that?
      I'm hedging my bets.

      Quote
      tìfyawìntxu
      "Guidance", not "guide".[/li][/list]
      Guide, not guidance. You been FROMMERED.

      tìfyawìntxuri oeyä
      my guidance

      ayngaru fyawivìntxu
      to guide you

      Who's been frommered?
      Me. I've been frommered. Changed.

      Quote
      yawne
      Adjective, not noun.
      Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.
      Where do you get that he implied it's a noun?  Beloved in English is primarily an adjective.
      Because prrton said it came from a noun.

      Quote
      Trying not to list +si words, unless they're given in the guide.
      I think mostly it makes sense to list +si words when they are at least partly idiomic, such as nari si or eltu si.  I wouldn't consider "work" or "apologize" to be terribly idiomic, they are pretty straight forward in meaning.  (Yes, I'm agreeing with you on this comment rather than disagreeing.)
      Yes, that's what I thought, too.

      One notes that the dictionary lists "lok" as a preposition, but we (also?) appear to have it as a verb, as "livok" shows up in the bit Frommer read for the NYT...
      Changed. Now as both.

      ean
      Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
      But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.
      If we have it attested as both adj and noun, shouldn't we state that?
      ftia
      Verb (ft<ol>ia in Norm's line).
      Could also be a noun.
      ditto, noun & verb
      nì'aw
      Adverb, not adjective.
      Could be either. Removed pos.
      ditto, adj & adv
      Good point. Changed all.
      nì'it
      Adverb, not noun: "a little, slightly".
      That's not the definition we were given. Going to keep this as a noun.
      The def. seems ambiguous to me: in "I ran a little bit", the phrase "a little bit" functions as an adverb, not as a noun, which would require that run be transitive. Not sure we should specify part of speech.
      Noted.
      yawne
      Adjective, not noun.
      Frommer. Noun. He is my beloved.
      It's not clear from Frommer. He says, "yawne means 'beloved.' (For the noun, the e has dropped. Happens a lot.)" That at least implies that "yawne" is not a noun. Do we have oeyä yawne ?
      Prrton says noun. I assume he's right.

      Where do we have "ean" attested as a noun, "ftia" as a noun, or "nì'aw" as an adjective?  I'm also inclined to believe that "nì'it" is an adverb, as it's just nì + 'it, implying the adverbial form of 'it.
      I don't know. Again, I'm waiting fore more. Perhaps this is a bad call? As for nì'it, that's a good point. Noted.

      Fyawìntxu:
      If you got that feeling from me, I do apologize, and the blame is mine. Oeru txoa livu.
      My purpose was (is) not to "show off", but to help by way of offering my thoughts and possibly insights. The list above is what occurred to me while going through the dictionary for another project.

      As for what's come before, I have read this thread, but it is a long one, and there have been many corrections and amendments along the way, and I simply do not trust myself to remember them all. There are also many other threads around the forum in which relevant stuff may have been discussed that I have missed. Hence the caveat. It was meant more as "I think this is new, but in case I'm wrong I apologize in advance" and I will gladly accept a simple dismissal along the lines of "this has been dealt with before".

      I didn't get that feeling. And I know how seriously long this thread is. Thanks for your suggestions.

      ean
      Confirmed as an adjective (oeyä eana txìm atsawl).
      But it could also be a noun. So, I marked it as null.
      There is also rim yellow which is marked as an adjective. Is there a more explicit source for this? (NB: I am not in possession of SG)
      But, generally, why not classify confirmed words with what we know for the time being, and add to this when/if new information occurs? Ean is demonstrably an adjective, even though it might be something else as well.
      Noted and changed. ean = adj. Editorial change: I'm going to start classifying words as being multiple parts of speech. That should help people out more than marking them as nothing. However, I don't want to change thinks until we have proof of either. That alright?

      ftia
      Verb (ft<ol>ia in Norm's line).
      Could also be a noun.
      See above.
      Proof of it as noun, anyone?

      kehe/srane
      How about calling these interjections?
      They're not emotive.
      Particles, then? Not trying to push the point, just making classification suggestions. (On that note: do we need to classify everything explicitly?)
      No, we don't, and yes, we do. I'm not sure what they are. Particles seems like a good suggestion, as they fill multiple roles and are a discourse marker.

      nì'aw
      Adverb, not adjective.
      Could be either. Removed pos.
      nì'it
      Adverb, not noun: "a little, slightly".
      That's not the definition we were given. Going to keep this as a noun.
      For these, I'v gone by the prefix nì-, which is adverbial in nature. Is there evidence for a non-adverbial function?
      We do have Pxan livu txo nì’aw oe ngari Only if I am worthy of you, where nì'aw functions adverbially. I suppose it comes down to the classification issue mentioned above again.
      Edited to adv. pending further evidence of adjectivity. See above.

      Additions
      • trram
        "yesterday" (attested in adverbial function)
      • -ur
        allomorph of -ru and -r (from the recent letter)
      • I don't know how many "si-verbs" you want to include as such, but other attested ones are tìkangkem si "work" and tsap'alute si "apologize".
      Sources? Trying not to list +si words, unless they're given in the guide.
      Trram is from that audio clip at New York Times. Granted, it is a transcription, but listening to Frommer's pronunciation I'd say it's a correct one. I won't argue the point, however.
      -ur is attested in the letter: Ayeylanur oeyä sì eylanur lì'fyayä leNa'vi nìwotx To all my friends and friends of the Na'vi language
      Tìkangkem si is too, whereas tsap'alute si is from here, albeit with a problematic infix. Now, my point in bringing these up was to see what plan you're employing with these compound verbs -- apparently they can arise from pretty much whatever, so listing every possible combination is meaningless, but one way of dealing with it is to only include those that have shown up in canon material. Either way is fine by me.
      Noted, added those two. I'm going off of adding +si verbs when they are idiomatic or attested in a source officially, as in the pocket guide. Don't want to go off of translations: I include the pocket guide because I don't want to be accused of exclusion. Won't add these two.


      More generally, I note with some surprise that i and ì are treated as the same letter in the lists, as are a and ä. This is flat-out wrong, obviously, but supposedly due to automatic sorting of some kind. Finally, a number of ìs have somehow gone missing from the changelog entry for v7, at least in my reader.
      It's not flat out wrong. It's an editorial decision designed to help the english reader. Given the small amount of ì and ä words, I didn't want to put them in their own section. Read the earlier parts of this thread. Not changing it, either. As for the lack of ì's in the changelog: that's made for people who have to edit the source code, so I don't really care. I change them when I note them.
      I struggled with that wording, being afraid that it would come across as harsh or cocky, but in the end decided to keep it. Bad call, I think.
      Anyway, my point is that they are different letters -- and more importantly, different phonemes -- and I have a slight concern that grouping them might be somewhat detrimental to students, as it could weaken this distinction. However, I accept the editorial decision. (Question: is it subject to change in the event we get more relevant words?)

      No, you just didn't know. That's cool. When I get more words, yes, I will change that.
      « Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 04:29:28 am by Taronyu »

      Offline roger

      • Taronyu
      • ****
      • Posts: 724
      • Karma: 22
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #268 on: January 25, 2010, 04:50:38 am »
      As for yawne being a noun, AFAIK Prrton only has the same email that's been quoted here. I believe he mistyped earlier, as was pointed out somewhere or other, maybe even by him. You might ask him.

      Yes, I agree with listing multiple parts of speech, assuming they are attested. However, I'm dubious about ean being noun and adj. With the structure "X a Y" for adj. and noun, the only way to know which is the adj and which is the noun is to know ahead of time which part of speech X and Y are. If X and Y were both both adj and noun, it would be impossible to know which modifies which. That's a possible ambiguity in the language, of course, but I'd need attestation to consider it a serious possibility.
      « Last Edit: January 25, 2010, 05:51:56 am by roger »

      Offline omängum fra'uti

      • Moderator Emeritus
      • Palulukan Makto
      • *****
      • *
      • Posts: 3804
      • Karma: 127
      • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
        • Pronounced Na'vi words
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #269 on: January 25, 2010, 05:04:38 am »
      Considering we have simple ways to transform words between nouns, adjectives and adverbs, IMO it's a really hard sell to try and convincingly portray that possibility.  Now having words which serve as a noun, verb, adjective or adverb and which can also fill some other part of speech in some cases (Conjunction, whatever the heck part of speech this use of "krr" I'm proposing in another thread is, etc) I can see as a possibility.

      But words that can be used as different parts of speech, I just don't see.  Especially with the free word order, there are even more ambiguities that could arise than just the simple adjective vs noun one.
      Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
      Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

      Offline Na'rìghawnu

      • Tute
      • ***
      • Posts: 352
      • Karma: 22
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #270 on: January 25, 2010, 07:35:43 am »
      Quote
      But words that can be used as different parts of speech, I just don't see. 

      Maybe I didn't understand you right, but as long as we don't have sentences with a word in it, it's sometimes simply unpossible to know, what the tiny information given in the SG-dictionary means.

      E. g. it says "atan   light". Err... what light? Is it the noun light (as in sunlight) or the adjective light. And if it is the adjective, what does it mean: light as the opposite to dark, or light as the opposite to heavy or ... or ... or ...? We just don't know. Maybe it's also the verb "to light sth." ...


      Offline omängum fra'uti

      • Moderator Emeritus
      • Palulukan Makto
      • *****
      • *
      • Posts: 3804
      • Karma: 127
      • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
        • Pronounced Na'vi words
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #271 on: January 25, 2010, 08:09:23 am »
      Yeah that's not quite what I meant.

      Atan I completely agree on.  It could be any one of those, each as valid as the next.  (Why oh why didn't the SG include parts of speech?  Oh yeah, because it would probably get them wrong anwyay.)

      What I'm referring to are words where we have contextual examples that firmly plant them into one part of speech.  We know, for example, that "Ean" is an adjective, because Frommer used it as a modifier for "txìm" in one interview.  So I don't see "Ean" as being a noun or anything else.  If you want a noun for "Ean", we have that, "Tìean".  "Tìean lor lu" - Blue is pretty.

      Similarly, I would be surprised to see a word which starts with "tì" and is clearly "tì+other word we know" being anything but a noun.  Or "nì+other word we know" being anything but an adverb.  And if we see something together with "yu" to indicate a doer of something, well good chance that the word lacking "yu" is a verb.  Similarly, any word which is seen with "nì" on it is likely NOT an adverb.  And any word spotted with "tì" on it is likely NOT a noun.  I have yet to see an attested counter-example to that.
      Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
      Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

      Offline Erimeyz

      • Taronyu
      • ****
      • Posts: 555
      • Karma: 33
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #272 on: January 25, 2010, 08:51:11 am »
      That's what I get for answering while having a hangover.

      Sounds like you've been taking my advice to heart.

      It's not clear from Frommer. He says, "yawne means 'beloved.' (For the noun, the e has dropped. Happens a lot.)" That at least implies that "yawne" is not a noun. Do we have oeyä yawne ?
      Prrton says noun. I assume he's right.

      Double-check your source for Prrton saying it's a noun.  He may have unsaid it later.

        - Eri

      Offline Mirri

      • 'Eveng
      • ***
      • Posts: 219
      • Karma: 6
      • Taronlì'uyu
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #273 on: January 25, 2010, 10:46:07 am »
      Just want to chime in here and say I strongly support the decision to include known categories for all the words, rather than leaving them blank.

      I'm keeping a JMemorize wordlist updated at the moment in order to learn the vocabulary and the blank categories are frustrating.


      Also, like Omängum Fra'uti brought up, I'd like to know if there's any evidence at all that a word starting with tì or nì is NOT a root with an affix? It seems like making up words beginning with those letters, which violate the grammar rule would make the language needlessly confusing.
      Ngaya poanìl new mune 'uti: hrrap sì uvan. Talun poanìl new ayfoeti -- ayfo lu lehrrap ayu leuvan.

      Offline omängum fra'uti

      • Moderator Emeritus
      • Palulukan Makto
      • *****
      • *
      • Posts: 3804
      • Karma: 127
      • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
        • Pronounced Na'vi words
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #274 on: January 25, 2010, 10:51:55 am »
      tìran v. run
      nìn v. look (at)

      The first is declared by Frommer to be a verb, the second is only a single syllable.

      That's why I qualified it as tì or nì + other word we know.
      Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
      Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

      Offline Lance R. Casey

      • Ikran Makto
      • *****
      • *
      • Posts: 948
      • se Sweden
      • Karma: 57
      • Man cenuva métim' andúnë?
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #275 on: January 25, 2010, 10:55:49 am »
      Also, like Omängum Fra'uti brought up, I'd like to know if there's any evidence at all that a word starting with tì or nì is NOT a root with an affix? It seems like making up words beginning with those letters, which violate the grammar rule would make the language needlessly confusing.

      Quick drive-by post (more later): there's tìran walk (v.), with confirmation in uniltìranyu dreamwalker (nomen agentis).

      EDIT: Not quick enough... ;)

      // Lance R. Casey

      Offline Na'rìghawnu

      • Tute
      • ***
      • Posts: 352
      • Karma: 22
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #276 on: January 25, 2010, 11:59:26 am »
      Quote
      with tì or nì is NOT a root with an affix?

      As said above, tìran is not composed. And there is tìng.

      And nìltsan may be a compound, but it's surely not nì + ltsan (rather it's a contracted nì + sìltsan, but not sure about this).


      Offline Alìm Tsamsiyu

      • Tute
      • ***
      • Posts: 326
      • Karma: 15
      • Skxawng Makto
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #277 on: January 25, 2010, 12:56:42 pm »
      There's a weird typo in your listing for the -ur suffix:

      Quote from: Taronyu's Dictionary
      –ur: [ur] W dative suffix for nouns ending
      in a consonant (allomorph of –ru):
      Ayeylanur oeyŁ. To my friends.
      Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
      My arrows fly far and strike true.

      Offline Taronyu

      • Meals on wheels
      • Olo'eyktan Anawm
      • Palulukan Makto
      • *****
      • *
      • Posts: 2714
      • Karma: 154
      • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
        • Burnt Fen
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #278 on: January 25, 2010, 01:04:05 pm »
      There's a weird typo in your listing for the -ur suffix:

      Quote from: Taronyu's Dictionary
      –ur: [ur] W dative suffix for nouns ending
      in a consonant (allomorph of –ru):
      Ayeylanur oeyŁ. To my friends.

      aysanu'siyu LaTeX.....

      Fixed. Updated.

      Offline Mirri

      • 'Eveng
      • ***
      • Posts: 219
      • Karma: 6
      • Taronlì'uyu
      Re: Our Dictionary
      « Reply #279 on: January 25, 2010, 01:19:59 pm »
      The Na'vi pocket guide has all the words for the pronoun trial case. Are these confirmed now? :)
      Ngaya poanìl new mune 'uti: hrrap sì uvan. Talun poanìl new ayfoeti -- ayfo lu lehrrap ayu leuvan.

       

      Become LearnNavi's friend on Facebook Follow LearnNavi on Twitter! Watch LearnNavi's videos on YouTube

      SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
      Privacy Policy
      | XHTML | RSS | WAP2 | Site Rules

      LearnNavi is not affiliated with the official Avatar website,
      James Cameron, or the Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation.
      All trademarks and servicemarks are the properties of their respective owners.
      Images in the LearnNavi.org Forums and Gallery may not be used without permission.

      LearnNavi Affiliates:
      ToS

      LearnNavi is the community to learn Na'vi, the Avatar Language
      "A place where real friendships are made." -Paul Frommer

      AvatarMeet | Learn Na'vi Forum | Learn Na'vi Wiki | Na'viteri

      LearnNavi