Author Topic: Wikipedia  (Read 1634 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Coda

  • Tawtute
  • *
  • Posts: 68
  • Karma: 2
Wikipedia
« on: December 28, 2009, 06:05:47 pm »
I'm kind of curious - is Kwamikagami, the principal editor of the wikipedia page, a member here?  I've been extremely impressed with how quickly the page has been put together, and how comprehensive a resource it's become.  They've even added likely but unsubstantiated elements of grammar, such as the subjunctive aspect iv.  We seem to have worked through that one not too long ago, and it promptly showed up on wikipedia yesterday.  I understand if you don't want to come out and reveal yourself, but great work, regardless.

Now, that said, why not translate Wikipedia into Na'vi!  How about wintitslamwep'seng?

Offline nebwahs

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2009, 04:10:52 am »
Oeri, na nga, tsa'uti tolse'a. Tuteri lì’utìtäftxurenuit tsatseng zolamunge txan nìnìwin! Oel tolse'a, fra'uri lu na Na'via fyawìntxu – kxawm tuteri lì’utìtäftxurenuit zolamunge nìyey ftu fyawìntxu...? Slä, po nìwin lolu!

I-TOP, like you, that-ACC see<PST>. Person-TOP grammar-ACC there bring<PST> very ADV-fast! I-ERG see<PST>, everything-TOP be like Na'vi-ADJ guide (Na'vi Pocket Guide ;)) - perhaps person-TOP grammar-ACC bring<PST> ADV-direct from guide...? But, it fast be<PST>!

I also saw that. Someone (a person) put it there very quickly! I noticed that everything is the same as the Na'vi Pocket Guide – perhaps someone brought it directly from there? Anyway, it was fast!

Offline Taronyu

  • Meals on wheels
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Karma: 154
  • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
    • Burnt Fen
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2009, 04:14:44 am »
Aylì'uyä renu aletoläftxua would work a lot better for grammar than Prrton's proposed lì’utìtäftxurenu. Using the words we have instead of making new ones is always a better choice. You don't need two on nìwin. Also, po isn't a word for it.

I think, rather, that the pocket guide was copied from Wiki. Not sure, though.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2009, 04:23:16 am by Taronyu »

Offline nebwahs

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2009, 04:23:41 am »
Irayo!
I suppose nìwin was already an adverb, yes?  ;)
I'll make a note of the alternative for 'grammar'. Isn't it frustrating how long-winded words become when we have to make do with what we have?
Ah well, it'll come in good time!

Yes, it might have been that way... the information in Wikipedia has everything from the Guide in it plus much more - perhaps the Guide was taken from there and more complicated points left out?

Offline Eywayä Irrtok

  • Tawtute
  • *
  • Posts: 50
  • Karma: -1
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2009, 07:38:50 am »
Aylì'uyä renu aletoläftxua would work a lot better for grammar than Prrton's proposed lì’utìtäftxurenu. Using the words we have instead of making new ones is always a better choice. You don't need two on nìwin. Also, po isn't a word for it.

I think, rather, that the pocket guide was copied from Wiki. Not sure, though.

What is the word for "it"?
Tìng mikyun nìltsan, fì’u fya’o ne tslayam letok lu -- mune sì mune tsìng lu.

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • Karma: 144
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2009, 08:56:03 am »
What is the word for "it"?

There may not be one.  Plenty of languages in the world get by without "it" — Mandarin Chinese is one major example that comes to mind.  It's possible "this" and "that" words, along with context, take up the job of Enlgish "it," but as with so much about Na'vi grammar right now, that's only a guess, though I hope an informed one.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • Karma: 144
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #6 on: December 30, 2009, 08:57:43 am »
Kwami knows about this site, and has even made a few edits to the LearnNavi.org wiki, but I don't know that he has time for the forum.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline MasterEro

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Karma: 1
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2009, 01:18:48 pm »
What is the word for "it"?

There may not be one.  Plenty of languages in the world get by without "it" — Mandarin Chinese is one major example that comes to mind.  It's possible "this" and "that" words, along with context, take up the job of Enlgish "it," but as with so much about Na'vi grammar right now, that's only a guess, though I hope an informed one.
He's correct. There isnt one yet. We need Frommer for a lot of different things, this being one of them.
I suggest using fì (this). As long as you phrased it correctly, it should make sense.

For example.
 Im learning to speak Na'vi, and this is hard.   
Oei nerume plltxeti nìNavi, sì fì ftue lu.

All of this in my opinion of course.

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • Karma: 144
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2009, 01:23:54 pm »
I suggest using fì (this). As long as you phrased it correctly, it should make sense.

For example.
 Im learning to speak Na'vi, and this is hard.   
Oei nerume plltxeti nìNavi, sì fì ftue lu.

The words "this" and "that" appear to be prefixes in Na'vi (as in the Frommer example, fì-skxawng).  When you want to use the word "this (thing)" alone, you need to use fì'u, as in fì'u ke lu ftue this is not easy.

I'm afraid we don't yet know how to correctly say "I learn to X".  It's pretty unlikely, though, that the verb will take the accusative marker as you have given here.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline Taronyu

  • Meals on wheels
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Karma: 154
  • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
    • Burnt Fen
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2009, 03:09:20 pm »
I suggest using fì (this). As long as you phrased it correctly, it should make sense.

For example.
 Im learning to speak Na'vi, and this is hard.   
Oei nerume plltxeti nìNavi, sì fì ftue lu.

The words "this" and "that" appear to be prefixes in Na'vi (as in the Frommer example, fì-skxawng).  When you want to use the word "this (thing)" alone, you need to use fì'u, as in fì'u ke lu ftue this is not easy.

I'm afraid we don't yet know how to correctly say "I learn to X".  It's pretty unlikely, though, that the verb will take the accusative marker as you have given here.

Since fì isn't listed as a prefix, I think it's safe to assume we can make it a noun.

It is very likelt that the verb would take an accusitive marker, but only if preceded by a noun-deriving nì. The infinitive in english takes the place of the accusitive NP, and so inflection would be expected.

Oel nerume nìplltxeti nìNavi, sì fì ftue lu.

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • Karma: 144
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2009, 03:27:35 pm »
Since fì isn't listed as a prefix, I think it's safe to assume we can make it a noun.

isn't listed at all.  We have extracted it from two examples of sentences from Frommer, namely the word f-ay-vrrtep these demons and fì-skxawng-ìri this moron.  I can see no reason to feel confident yanking out and using it alone.  Why else do we have fì'u?

Quote
It is very likelt that the verb would take an accusitive marker, but only if preceded by a noun-deriving nì. The infinitive in english takes the place of the accusitive NP, and so inflection would be expected.

I assume you mean noun-deriving tì-.  Even so, this is a very Indo-European-centric way of arranging the construction.  We have not the teeniest shred of evidence Na'vi handles dependent verbs this way.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline Prrntxe

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: 2
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2009, 10:25:14 pm »
Now, that said, why not translate Wikipedia into Na'vi!  How about wintitslamwep'seng?

I was thinking something like wìkìpirya.
Oeri Loräkx lu. Fpi ayutral plltxe oe.

Offline edmoreira

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: 9
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2009, 01:07:12 am »
I assume you mean noun-deriving tì-.  Even so, this is a very Indo-European-centric way of arranging the construction.  We have not the teeniest shred of evidence Na'vi handles dependent verbs this way.

Oh! I so need to know how to handle dependent verbs! But in the meantime this would be an elegant way to deal with it according to the rules we have so far. Hmmmm


Oel nerume nìplltxeti nìNavi, sì fì ftue lu.

So I think I would say something like

Oel nerume tìplltxeti Na'viyä a fi'u oeru ftue ke lo
I am learning the speech of the Na'vi which this thing is not easy to me

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3111
  • Karma: 144
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2009, 09:54:01 am »
I assume you mean noun-deriving tì-.  Even so, this is a very Indo-European-centric way of arranging the construction.  We have not the teeniest shred of evidence Na'vi handles dependent verbs this way.

Oh! I so need to know how to handle dependent verbs! But in the meantime this would be an elegant way to deal with it according to the rules we have so far. Hmmmm

For centuries English was deformed by schoolmasters trying to force it to fit into the same shape as classical Latin.  It's  not clear to me it's elegant Na'vi to pretend it, too, is an Indo-European language.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline Taronyu

  • Meals on wheels
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Karma: 154
  • Lacho Calad! Drego Morn!
    • Burnt Fen
Re: Wikipedia
« Reply #14 on: December 31, 2009, 12:47:17 pm »
Since fì isn't listed as a prefix, I think it's safe to assume we can make it a noun.

isn't listed at all.  We have extracted it from two examples of sentences from Frommer, namely the word f-ay-vrrtep these demons and fì-skxawng-ìri this moron.  I can see no reason to feel confident yanking out and using it alone.  Why else do we have fì'u?

Quote
It is very likelt that the verb would take an accusitive marker, but only if preceded by a noun-deriving nì. The infinitive in english takes the place of the accusitive NP, and so inflection would be expected.

I assume you mean noun-deriving tì-.  Even so, this is a very Indo-European-centric way of arranging the construction.  We have not the teeniest shred of evidence Na'vi handles dependent verbs this way.

You make two very good points here. One is that I am a skxawng, and that I keep confusing tì with nì. The second is that I am being indoeuropean centric.


Hmm. What to do. I agree with you, but I like my derivations.

 

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

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines | XHTML | RSS | WAP2 | Site Rules

LearnNavi is not affiliated with the official Avatar website,
James Cameron, LightStorm Entertainment or The Walt Disney Company.
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