Author Topic: Somewhat detailed question  (Read 1205 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vawmataw

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 5494
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 91
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #20 on: November 13, 2014, 04:16:46 pm »
Quote
Krr a oe larmu ’eveng, tilvìng/timvìng fra’ut a smon oer sa’sem angay.
The use of krr a instead of krra is interesting.

Quote
tilvìng/timvìng fra’ut a smon oer sa’sem angay
Why fra'ut a?

Here's an alternative way: frakem silvi/simvi fte smivon oer oeyä sa'sem angay.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2014, 04:26:43 pm by Vawmataw »

Offline Plumps

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 5968
  • Karma: 213
  • ’Ivong Na’vi
    • Aylì'uä Ramunong (Pìlok)
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2014, 04:46:00 pm »
Quote
Krr a oe larmu ’eveng, tilvìng/timvìng fra’ut a smon oer sa’sem angay.
The use of krr a instead of krra is interesting.

Quote
tilvìng/timvìng fra’ut a smon oer sa’sem angay
Why fra'ut a?

Here's an alternative way: frakem silvi/simvi fte smivon oer oeyä sa'sem angay.

krra / krr a is interchangable as far as I can remember (whereas it’s always a krr) – I don’t know, I’d like to go with the parallelism to other conjunctions. Usually I use krra. Don’t know why I chose it this way.

 :o You are right, now that you mention it, fte would be better and frakem si works as well, more to the sense of “I would have done everything” … probably a better way from the meaning of the sentence. ‘give everything’ is also kind of idiomatic.

Offline Tìtstewan

  • LearnNavi Zeykoyu
  • Toruk Makto
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9663
  • de Germany
  • Karma: 318
  • Ke lu oeru kea krr krrtalun!
    • My YouTube Channel
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #22 on: November 14, 2014, 12:03:11 am »
HRH

I really thought about that construction "fra'ut a ...", and deep in my brain I wondered why.
That idea with frakem silvi I had at reply #7 as an alternative for tilvìng fra'ut. IHMO, both are a good way to say "I would have done everything to..."* or "I would have given everything to"* as both expressions means an action one would have done to get something.

Grammatically, yes. But the meaning? I think “for heaven’s sake” has a religious background. As of right now, I would understand the Na’vi sentence quite literally and then I would go ??? what can you do “for the (sake of the) sky” ???
To be honest, I wasn't sure about this too, and I hoped that it could work as an interjection.
What would be the equivalence for "for heaven’s sake" in Na'vi?
I thought about this. What if we could say something like this in Na'vi: "For Eywa!"? Would that not be something like "Eywafpi!"? ??? It would be an uncompleted sentence "X for Y" and X is mostly an action one do, but don't say what action in the sentence -> (X) Y-fpi.

-| Dict-Na'vi.com | Na'viteri Files | FAQ | LM | Puk Pxaw 'Rrta | Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Offline Lance R. Casey

  • Ikran Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 948
  • se Sweden
  • Karma: 57
  • Man cenuva métim' andúnë?
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #23 on: November 14, 2014, 06:14:21 am »
There is still confusion about the use of tense+(im)perfective action and I would give almost anything for a detailed blog post about that from Karyu Pawl. ;) This is how I see it, other opinons may vary.

For me, ‹arm› respresents a time frame because, although it happened in the past, I’m sure the person who’s talking didn’t wish just for one time but over a period of a time or many times.
Within this time frame other actions can occur and that’s where ‹ol› comes into play.

No, you've got it. There are a number of canon examples of this structure as well, e.g.:

   Oel hu Txewì trram na'rìngit tarmok, tsole'a syeptutet atsawl frato mì sìrey. (1)

   ’Evanìl alo a’awve nì’awtu na’rìngit tarmok, ha tolìng lawr nìfwefwi fteke txopu sivi. (2)

Your explanation is also almost identical to the one I remember a series of French teachers used to lay out the difference between imparfait and passé composé back in the day. Another more visual approach that is sometimes used is an EKG graph: the imperfect form corresponds to the baseline (background, setting), and the perfective to the bursts of the heartbeats (events standing out from the background).

// Lance R. Casey

Offline Blue Elf

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 5391
  • cz Czech Republic
  • Karma: 112
    • My attempt for blog
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #24 on: November 14, 2014, 01:40:47 pm »
I don't think it would be "zun" would it?  I mean, it's not /if/ I was a child, conditional, it is fixed past tense. (Would it matter if the sentiment is still somewhat present today?)
---
Wasn't sure if "for the life of me" was too idiomatic.
And second one was more referring to "Oh, for heaven's sake!" "For pity's sake!" and such.
I'm afraid all was already said, but to summarize some facts:
zun/zel really doesn't work here, as first part of the statement is not hypothetical (and second one probably too, as whole sentenc can be rewritten to: "When I was a child, I wanted to give anything to know my real parents")

Quote
Too wussy.  At least in my opinion.  Or would the Na'vi not understand the desperation that comes with abandonment (hence no bio/foster/step/ etc. relatives)?  I'm really trying to not be hostile towards you guys, but Na'vi seems to be a very emotional language and there is emotion to be conveyed here.
Na'vi language is quite limited in available vocabulary, so something is hard to say, although we able also able to say some quite difficult ideas. Take what was proposed as best we can do. You can disagree with proposal, but that's all you can do until we get better words/constructions ;D (no offense intended, please)
Quote
<iv> and <ol> usually merges to <ilv>.
It always does :)
Quote
krra / krr a is interchangable as far as I can remember (whereas it’s always a krr)
Krra is preferred, while krr a is not forbidden (link)
Oe lu skxawng skxakep. Slä oe nerume mi.
"Oe tasyätxaw ulte koren za'u oehu" (Limonádový Joe)


Offline Vawmataw

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 5494
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 91
Re: Somewhat detailed question
« Reply #25 on: November 14, 2014, 03:53:38 pm »
Krra didn't appear before 2012, so krr a is the archaic version of krra.

 

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