Author Topic: plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction  (Read 100 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Puvomun

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3903
  • nl Netherlands
  • Karma: 55
  • Ayoeyä sa'nok anawm ngahu
    • PaganPaul's
plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction
« on: July 03, 2017, 01:56:58 pm »
Kaltxì ma frapo,

I'm looking for a decent way to interpret and explain plltxe not being classified as VIN or VTR but merely as a verb.

Is there a good rule of thumb to state when plltxe can be used as vtr and when it's vin?

I can see that in a sentence like Po plltxe san Ts'u sìltsan lu sik it's used as vin, where in a sentence like Pol plltxe futa nga lu skxawng it's used as vtr.

Am I right in this? Does anyone have other ideas, suggestions etc.?

Irayo seiyi ayngaru...

Ta Puvomun.
Krr a lì'fya lam sraw, may' frivìp utralit.

Ngopyu ayvurä.

Offline Plumps

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 5966
  • Karma: 213
  • ’Ivong Na’vi
    • Aylì'uä Ramunong (Pìlok)
Re: plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2017, 02:26:56 pm »
You pretty much nailed it.

Together with san … sìk, or when you use an adposition plltxe teri “speak about” you use it as an intransitive verb.

When you say what is being spoken, or if you use indirect speech plltxe teyngta … you use it as a transitive verb.

Offline Tirea Aean

  • The Blue One
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9592
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 235
  • Can't help helpin'
    • Tirea Aean
Re: plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2017, 11:06:53 am »
Kaltxì ma Puvomun! Great to see you again! :D

To further explain this in the words of Karyu Pawl, I will quote/link his relevant Na'viteri post:

As you know, the main speech verb is plltxe, which can be both transitive and intransitive. When you’re reporting what someone said, the most idiomatic way to express that in Na’vi is to use plltxe intransitively, with san and sìk. You also know that Na’vi likes direct speech, where you’re quoting someone’s words exactly, rather than indirect speech.

Quote
Now how do you translate simple things like “What did she say?” and “She didn’t say that”?

For these, we use plltxe as a transitive verb. But what do you use for “what” and “that” in those sentences? The obvious candidates are peut and tsat respectively

Quote
Na’vi prefers to be more specific: what you say is words.

(If you’re talking about a single word, it’s tsalì’ut.)

so basically,

Quote from: Puvomun
I can see that in a sentence like Po plltxe san Tsa'u sìltsan lu sìk it's used as vin, where in a sentence like Pol plltxe futa nga lu skxawng it's used as vtr.

Am I right in this? Does anyone have other ideas, suggestions etc.?

You would be exactly right in your logic here.

Though it's preferred to use fayluta over futa in this case. (since the base word of fayluta is lì'u, which makes more specific sense with plltxe than the catch-all generic futa which comes from 'u)

Check out the full Na'viteri post about this here: http://naviteri.org/2011/08/reported-speech-reported-questions/

Offline Puvomun

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3903
  • nl Netherlands
  • Karma: 55
  • Ayoeyä sa'nok anawm ngahu
    • PaganPaul's
Re: plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2017, 09:48:38 pm »
Irayo mengaru!

I'm glad I was on the right track interpreting this. I have a lady friend who wants to learn Na'vi (she's very shy about forums and so never joins one) and she was quite confused about plltxe.
Now I can explain this in a well founded manner. :)
Krr a lì'fya lam sraw, may' frivìp utralit.

Ngopyu ayvurä.

Online `Eylan Ayfalulukanä

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 4612
  • us United States
  • Karma: 44
  • Palulukan alu Kenya 06/23/1996 - 01/15/2017
    • The Lionlamb website
Re: plltxe and its confusing vin / vtr affliction
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2017, 04:17:34 pm »
In general, a verb that is marked as vtr can be used transitively or intransitively, as discussed in this thread.

A verb marked vin can only be used intransitively.

For whatever reason, we have never gotten a ruling from K. Pawl on the transitivity of some verbs. In all cases I am aware of, such words can be treated as if they are vtr in the sense that they can be used transitively or intransitively, as context dictates.

The limitations on verbs marked vin notwithstanding, it is the presence or absence of the noun case markers that gives you the clue of how the verb should be treated, in ambiguous situations (which thankfully are rare, bot not entirely absent).

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

 

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

SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines | 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