A collection

[NeotrekkerZ]

Ma wm.annis,
see my post for the same question in English structures.

[wm.annis]

Does this mean I never traveled to Hometree is Oe kawkrr ne Kelutral ke samop?

Yep.

irv:  I wish I were going there
ilv:  I wish I had gone there

Mmm... not quite.  The nìrangal construction we got is for unattainable wishes (or at least wishes the speaker considers unattainable).  So, more like "If only I were going there!" or "If only I had gone there!"

Also, if my interpretation of ilv is correct, how would you translate alm in my example sentence? 

alm:  I had gone there (no possibility)

I have no idea how to interpret this.

[NeotrekkerZ]

Mmm... not quite.  The nìrangal construction we got is for unattainable  wishes (or at least wishes the speaker considers unattainable).  So, more like "If only I were going there!" or "If only I had gone there!"

So Oe(l) rangal (tsnì or futa) oe tsirvun sivop ne Pandora would be I wish I could travel to Pandora (even though it's impossible)?  Not sure about the transitivity of rangal.

I have no idea how to interpret this.

Should have been more clear here.  If you saw Fo kalmä ne Kelutral, would you translate it as She had gone to Hometree?

[Keylstxatsmen]

I also asked about nouns ending in the pseudo-vowels.  Because they cannot occur in closed syllables or occur next to their consonantal siblings there are some interesting puzzles.

I don't understand that line:  we have krrnetx krrpe, kllfro', kllkä, etc...

I can see why "krrt" would be illegal, but not "krrti" - unless it is just a matter of Dr. Frommer's personal preference.

-Keyl

[Lance R. Casey]

I also asked about nouns ending in the pseudo-vowels.  Because they cannot occur in closed syllables or occur next to their consonantal siblings there are some interesting puzzles.

I don't understand that line:  we have krrnetx krrpe, kllfro', kllkä, etc...

I can see why "krrt" would be illegal, but not "krrti" - unless it is just a matter of Dr. Frommer's personal preference.

He's referring to the process whereby r + rr > r or l + ll > l, as in poltxe (plltxe + ‹ol›. Regarding krrt versus krrti, the t is syllable-initial in the latter (first syllable is open), but syllable-final in the former (first syllable is closed).

[Keylstxatsmen]

He's referring to the process whereby r + rr > r or l + ll > l, as in poltxe (plltxe + ‹ol›.

Ah, cool. That's what you were talking about.  I didn't realize that ll + r would also be "unstable".  Make sense now.

Regarding krrt versus krrti, the t is syllable-initial in the latter (first syllable is open), but syllable-final in the former (first syllable is closed).

Yes, I as I said, I see why "krrt" is illegal, but I thought that he said the ones in parenthesis (including krrti and 'ewllti) should be avoided.  Or was he just talking about ('ewllru) and ('ewllri)?

-Keyl

[wm.annis]

Yes, I as I said, I see why "krrt" is illegal, but I thought that he said the ones in parenthesis (including krrti and 'ewllti) should be avoided.  Or was he just talking about ('ewllru) and ('ewllri)?

Only the ones I crossed out, is how I interpret Frommer's comments.  The long accusatives, trrti, 'ewllti should be fine.  I hadn't added question marks to those in the mail I sent him.

[wm.annis]

So Oe(l) rangal (tsnì or futa) oe tsirvun sivop ne Pandora would be I wish I could travel to Pandora (even though it's impossible)?  Not sure about the transitivity of rangal.

We don't yet know how to use rangal fully.  He gave me enough to work with the Coyote tale, but the word "wish" was also on our list of desired words to him.  Hopefully he'll give syntax guidance in that.

Should have been more clear here.  If you saw Fo kalmä ne Kelutral, would you translate it as She had gone to Hometree?

As it stands, I would not.  I'd translate that just as "They went to Hometree."  But, in some compound sentences, the "had gone" might make sense for an English translation, based on what I've seen of Frommer's use of the perfective in the Message from Paul.

[roger]

Here, without the –o the opening could be read, "It was the day when . . .

Could you give the phrase without the -o meaning 'it was the day when', so that we can see the contrast?

Yola krr, txana krr, ke transten

I assume *transten is a typo. Do you know what it's supposed to be? I'm not finding any likely candidate.

[omängum fra'uti]

Tsranten.  I actually didn't even realize it wasn't until you mentioned it, I'm apparently fluent in Na'vi typo too.

[roger]

Wouldn't it be great if we could use the intentional mood in other tenses, say to distinguish

    po zamup "he fell"

from

    ??po zasmup "he took a fall" ?

That would be handy for so many things: "he coughed" because he has a cold vs. "he coughed" as an ehem warning to s.o. about to spill the beans. Etc.

[Plumps]

That's an interesting aspect ... well, let's see what Frommer says to that...

I only hope that the amount of infixes that we have won't lead to confusion or that we can't distinguish the base verb underneath it all

[roger]

It doesn't actually seem to be a problem. They're in set positions, mostly just in one, and after you see the forms over and over, I expect you'd get a feel for them. A bit like worrying that Turkish vowel harmony would obscure the underlying word--after a while, you don't even notice it.

Since every single verb we have apart from compounds is at most disyllabic, then they're pretty straightforward to parse: Consonant, infix, remainder of verb root.

We have 31 infixes, counting fused ones. If the intentional can be used in the non-future, that would grow to 34. There are lots of languages which have more case-number-gender forms on their nouns or PNG-TAM forms on their verbs than 34, often quite irregular, and their speakers don't have any problem!

[Kì'eyawn]

Wouldn't it be great if we could use the intentional mood in other tenses, say to distinguish

    po zamup "he fell"

from

    ??po zasmup "he took a fall" ?

That would be handy for so many things: "he coughed" because he has a cold vs. "he coughed" as an ehem warning to s.o. about to spill the beans. Etc.

Oe mllteie!

[Ayzìsìt Alenantang]

Why isn't anyone writing a new pocket guide with all these updates?

[Taronyu]

Why isn't anyone writing a new pocket guide with all these updates?

Because of time. Karyu Amawey has tons of essays, and the Na'vi in a Nutshell thing wouldn't have the space to take this up. I've discontinued my Grammar project, and I think roger is making one for linguists, but no one is willing to put in effort for something that would be obselete tomorrow.

The wiki is our own hope now...

[NeotrekkerZ]

The two future markers have alternate forms with s: -ì(s)y- and -a(s)y- . The s-forms are used optionally to indicate determination to bring something about rather than a simple prediction about the future.

I'm wondering if we could also use these infixes to make "shall verb" sentences. 

Oe ultxa sasyi hu ngaru slä ke set.  I shall meet with you (later), but not now.

Thoughts?

[roger]

That's what "will" originally meant, though that's been obscured by time. So asy, ìsy are like the English "future" of centuries past, whereas ay, ìy are true futures as found in Latin.