Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter

Started by Payoang, January 20, 2010, 02:11:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

suomichris

Quote from: omängum fra'uti on January 21, 2010, 04:24:33 AM
Has anyone noticed that the grammatic role "tsakrr" fills isn't that of a noun, like tsa+othernoun typically (Presumably) would?

We see this in Avatar too, "Oel pot spìmìyang, tsakrr za'a aungia ta Eywa" - I was about to kill him, then(that-time) come sign from Eywa

Tì'eyngit oel tolel a krr, ayngaru payeng, tsakrr paye'un sweya fya'ot a zamivunge oel ayngar aylì'ut horentisì lì'fyayä leNa'vi.
I get answer which time, will tell to you, then(that-time) decide best way that I give to you words and rules of Na'vi language
Hmm...  To me, tsakrr just seems like a normal "then" conjunction type thing.  For /a krr/, I wonder if it's something more like "at the same time..."  So maybe this is more like "As soon as I hear, I will tell you.  And then, after I've told you, at some point, I'll decide..."

Ftiafpi

Quote from: suomichris on January 21, 2010, 11:09:27 AM
Quote from: Alìm Tsamsiyu on January 21, 2010, 10:37:01 AMYeah that -t- really bothers me, I don't have a clue what it does there.

It looks like the accusative, but I don't think it would work like that...

Maybe someone else has a better idea?

The /t/ is there because it is the object of the verb:

I know that (...).
Subj V Obj

You're getting the subordinate clause marker taking the case for the whole clause..

doh, I looked through that sentence looking specifically for that but some how overlooked it. Anyway, irayo.

wm.annis

Quote from: Tawtute on January 21, 2010, 09:40:33 AMThis kìyevame breaks up into kame, ìy, and ev. We know that the whole meaning is "see again soon".
We know that ìy is recent future infix, so kìyame is "see soon", but what is ev? If think that is the infix for repeating, so kevame would mean "re-see".

Perhaps it's reflexive (we know this is possible from Frommer, just not what the infix is), "we'll see *each other*."

Ftiafpi

Quote from: wm.annis on January 21, 2010, 12:09:14 PM
Quote from: Tawtute on January 21, 2010, 09:40:33 AMThis kìyevame breaks up into kame, ìy, and ev. We know that the whole meaning is "see again soon".
We know that ìy is recent future infix, so kìyame is "see soon", but what is ev? If think that is the infix for repeating, so kevame would mean "re-see".

Perhaps it's reflexive (we know this is possible from Frommer, just not what the infix is), "we'll see *each other*."

Oooo, I like were you're going with this, makes a lot of sense to me and I don't think we've had any other cannon phrases that have used anything that could be similar to a reflexive form, yes?

Keylstxatsmen

Quote from: Ftiafpi on January 21, 2010, 12:19:38 PM
Quote from: wm.annis on January 21, 2010, 12:09:14 PM
Quote from: Tawtute on January 21, 2010, 09:40:33 AMThis kìyevame breaks up into kame, ìy, and ev. We know that the whole meaning is "see again soon".
We know that ìy is recent future infix, so kìyame is "see soon", but what is ev? If think that is the infix for repeating, so kevame would mean "re-see".

Perhaps it's reflexive (we know this is possible from Frommer, just not what the infix is), "we'll see *each other*."

Oooo, I like were you're going with this, makes a lot of sense to me and I don't think we've had any other cannon phrases that have used anything that could be similar to a reflexive form, yes?

Dr. Frommer has confirmed in personal emails (not to me) that there is no <ev> infix.  Why it's there in kìyevame, has not been explained though.

-Keyl
Oeru lì'fya leNa'vi prrte' leiu nìtxan! 

Txo nga new leskxawnga tawtutehu nìNa'vi pivängkxo, oeru 'upxaret fpe' ulte ngaru srungit tayìng oel.  Faylì'ut alor nume 'awsiteng ko!

omängum fra'uti

Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Ftiafpi

Quote from: omängum fra'uti on January 21, 2010, 12:37:43 PM
Well that sort of ruängins that fun. :(

Agreed, a blanket statement saying that <ev> doesn't exist really screws things up... I guess that means '(k)ev' is in some way a (possibly liniated) word, probably one that we don't have?

Keylstxatsmen

Quote from: Ftiafpi on January 21, 2010, 12:42:11 PM
Quote from: omängum fra'uti on January 21, 2010, 12:37:43 PM
Well that sort of ruängins that fun. :(

Agreed, a blanket statement saying that <ev> doesn't exist really screws things up... I guess that means '(k)ev' is in some way a (possibly liniated) word, probably one that we don't have?

High traffic words have a tendency to be irregular  It's probably not going to be anything we use anywhere else, sadly.

-Keyl
Oeru lì'fya leNa'vi prrte' leiu nìtxan! 

Txo nga new leskxawnga tawtutehu nìNa'vi pivängkxo, oeru 'upxaret fpe' ulte ngaru srungit tayìng oel.  Faylì'ut alor nume 'awsiteng ko!

suomichris

I'm still thinking it's going to turn out to be the subjunctive:

"May (we) see (each other) soon!"

Robert Nantangä Tirea

#189
Aylì'ufa awngeyä 'eylanä a'ewan...

Confirmation on chained possessiveness, if I'm correct?

Useful for things like "... my bow's string's length...". Appears to be order dependent but not location dependent around the possessed object?

If I am translating the sentence right, it reads Language (of) 'your (one/particular)'(?) young-friend Markus... it looks like you can put the possessor nouns before or after their object (language your(one/particular) friend's) OR (your(one/particular) friend's language).

much to think about  :)

How does a man choose between fresh and fly?

COSPLAY LIKE A BOSS!

NotW Celebrity #11!

Robert Nantangä Tirea


How does a man choose between fresh and fly?

COSPLAY LIKE A BOSS!

NotW Celebrity #11!

omängum fra'uti

Aylì'ufa awngeyä 'eylanä a'ewan...
word-PL-per 1-PL-INCL-GEN friend-GEN young-ATTR

Awngeyä 'eylan a'ewan...
Our young friend

Aylì'ufa awngeyä 'eylanä a'ewan...
The words of our young friend
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Alìm Tsamsiyu

Quote from: suomichris on January 21, 2010, 11:09:27 AM
Quote from: Alìm Tsamsiyu on January 21, 2010, 10:37:01 AMYeah that -t- really bothers me, I don't have a clue what it does there.

It looks like the accusative, but I don't think it would work like that...

Maybe someone else has a better idea?

The /t/ is there because it is the object of the verb:

I know that (...).
Subj V Obj

You're getting the subordinate clause marker taking the case for the whole clause..

Ahh OK.  That's what I was speculating in my mind but it didn't seem to work right until I saw it written down. Oe ngaru irayo si.

Quote from: Robert Nantangä Tirea on January 21, 2010, 01:46:42 PM
Quote from: omängum fra'uti on January 21, 2010, 04:47:39 AM
(clip) However IANAL so... (clip)

wow... I just got this.... *facepalm*

tslolam!  ;)

What did you think it was before? Hopefully not something to do with aytìm...
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

suomichris

Quote from: Robert Nantangä Tirea on January 21, 2010, 01:36:27 PM
Aylì'ufa awngeyä 'eylanä a'ewan...

Confirmation on chained possessiveness, if I'm correct?

Useful for things like "... my bow's string's length...". Appears to be order dependent but not location dependent around the possessed object?

If I am translating the sentence right, it reads Language (of) 'your (one/particular)'(?) young-friend Markus... it looks like you can put the possessor nouns before or after their object (language your(one/particular) friend's) OR (your(one/particular) friend's language).
I think this is actually:

Ay-lì'ufa awnge-yä 'eylan-ä a'ewan...
PL-word(?) our-GEN friend-GEN young

So we get:

[Aylì'ufa [awngeyä ['eylanä a'ewan]]...
lit., "word of the young friend of ours..."

suomichris

I was thinking about "work" some more...

Frommer says "kan" is "aim," which probably becomes "kang" because of the following /k/.  The "kem," I think, is the same morpheme we see in, e.g., "fìkem, tsakem," etc., where it refers to a manner or action.  So

tìkangkem si

would be, literally, "do like aiming," "do in a way like aiming," which, if you're a hunter, is probably a bit like a writer using "put pen to paper" to refer to work...

Robert Nantangä Tirea

Any refrence for awgne as us (leading to awngeyä as our)?


How does a man choose between fresh and fly?

COSPLAY LIKE A BOSS!

NotW Celebrity #11!

Alìm Tsamsiyu

Quote from: suomichris on January 21, 2010, 01:57:11 PM
I think this is actually:

Ay-lì'ufa awnge-yä 'eylan-ä a'ewan...
PL-word(?) our-GEN friend-GEN young

So we get:

[Aylì'ufa [awngeyä ['eylanä a'ewan]]...
lit., "word of the young friend of ours..."

It can probably be broken down to: Ay-lì'u-fa (PL-word-by.means.of)

Which would then suggest "Words (that came to us) by means of Markus, our young friend"

Of course this interpretation somewhat disregards the -GEN on the end of friend... :/
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

Alìm Tsamsiyu

Quote from: Robert Nantangä Tirea on January 21, 2010, 02:04:11 PM
Any refrence for awgne as us (leading to awngeyä as our)?



He uses "awnga" to mean "us" as a contracted version of ayoeng quite a few times in the message.

This would then go to "awngeyä" using awnga + -eyä pronoun genitive suffix.
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

omängum fra'uti

Quote from: Alìm Tsamsiyu on January 21, 2010, 02:05:05 PM
Quote from: suomichris on January 21, 2010, 01:57:11 PM
I think this is actually:

Ay-lì'ufa awnge-yä 'eylan-ä a'ewan...
PL-word(?) our-GEN friend-GEN young

So we get:

[Aylì'ufa [awngeyä ['eylanä a'ewan]]...
lit., "word of the young friend of ours..."

It can probably be broken down to: Ay-lì'u-fa (PL-word-by.means.of)

Which would then suggest "Words (that came to us) by means of Markus, our young friend"

Of course this interpretation somewhat disregards the -GEN on the end of friend... :/

The English version is the "words of our young friend" variety.
By means of the words of our young friend
Of young friend = 'eylanä a'ewan
Our = awngeyä

It's a little twisted because you have "our" associated to the noun to the right, then "our young friend" assicated to the left of that.  But that is the only interpretation that makes sense in that context, since pronouns can not really be possessed.  I'm not sure why he did it that way, and I'm disappointed because I was curious what would happen if the adjective slipped between the nouns.  However, there are cases which make a difference..

If it were (Dropping the adposition)...
Aylì'u sempulyä oeyä 'eylanä a'ewan
The words of my young friend's father?
The words of my father's young friend?


In this case I *THINK* it could be disambiguated by the same means, moving the pronoun to before sempul or after 'eylan.  Without the pronoun that wouldn't be possible, but you can always stick a pronoun in there, because it is someone's father and someone's friend.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Kiliyä

Quote from: omängum fra'uti on January 21, 2010, 02:45:27 PMIf it were (Dropping the adposition)...
Aylì'u sempulyä oeyä 'eylanä a'ewan
The words of my young friend's father?
The words of my father's young friend?

In this case I *THINK* it could be disambiguated by the same means, moving the pronoun to before sempul or after 'eylan.  Without the pronoun that wouldn't be possible, but you can always stick a pronoun in there, because it is someone's father and someone's friend.
the words of the father of the young friend of me.

aylì'u sempulyä 'eylanä a'ewan oeyä...
Peu sa'nokyä ayoengyä?  Pefya ayoeng poeru kìte'e sayi?
Pefya ayoengìl poeti hayawnu, na poel ayoengit hawnu?

What of our mother?  How shall we serve her?  How shall we protect her as she protects us?