Author Topic: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter  (Read 16953 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alìm Tsamsiyu

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
  • Karma: 15
  • Skxawng Makto
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #80 on: January 20, 2010, 05:20:49 pm »
No, I think he means tìyawn is already a noun, and can't be broken down further.

Tsaswirä lu oe.
That creature be me.
It was me.

Ayoengur vay set ke lu horen amuiä fpi lì'u kemä "kangkem" ta Karyu Pawl.

You-<TOP> up-to now not be rules correct for word-action "kangkem" from teacher Paul.

As of now, you don't have the correct rules for the verb "kangkem" from Prof. Paul.

Rä'ä si sat! Nìmun pol horenìt fpi fìlì'u fpaye', slä ke vay set!
!
Don't do now! Again he rules<ACC> for this-word sent, but not up-to now!!

Don't use it yet.  We will again send rules for this word, but not yet!!

lì'u 'uyä "yawn" tsun livu lì'u 'uyä nì'aw. KE TSUN lì'u kemä livu tìkenongfa "y-ol-awn" Kehe Kehe!

Word-thing "yawn" can be word-thing only. Not can verb be example-for "y-ol-awn" no no!

The noun "yawn" can only be a noun".  It can't be a verb for example: "y-ol-awn", no no!

Fì'u lu koren a Karyu Pawl zola'u.

This is rule that Teach Paul come<PER>.

This is the rule that has come from Prof. Frommer.

Ayoengur vay set fra'u a ayoeng zene tslivam fte pivlltxe fìlì'ut nìlì'u lekem

You-all<TOP> up-to now everything that you must understand for speak this word like-word-action.

You already understand everything that you need to say this word as a verb.

-Keyl


I don't see how this is relevant to the quote you inserted?

I got all that from his post, and yes I've been coming up with ways to make use of "yawn" as a noun, but it still doesn't explain his choice of listing it as "yawn" and not "tìyawn," and if that was his intention, why is tì- added?

Because maybe the word IS "tìyawn" and it's not actually tì+yawn?

Again:

No, I think he means tìyawn is already a noun, and can't be broken down further.

Well then why does he say:

Quote
yawn love (NB: this ONLY the noun)
.
.
.
tìkangkem work (the verb cannot be derived and conjugated directly on kang by removing )

Hmm?

Why not put "tìyawn" followed by a similar parenthetical statement as the one accompanying "tìkangkem?"
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

Offline Eight

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Karma: 19
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #81 on: January 20, 2010, 05:22:06 pm »
Because maybe the word IS "tìyawn" and it's not actually tì+yawn?
Maybe it is. Was it Prrton who posted the rules? Maybe "yawn" is just an oddity in the way he's explaining what Dr. Frommer said regarding tiyawn?

Offline NeotrekkerZ

  • Taronyu
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Karma: 40
  • Nume ralit lì'fyayä ulte nga tayìran Eywahu.
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #82 on: January 20, 2010, 05:23:29 pm »
I didn't see this listed on SeaBass's post:

peng to let know, inform

Also, anyone know what sivi is?  I can't seem to find it.
We already had "peng" in our vocab, in both bare and compound words.  (ral+peng = interpret for example)

sivi is just "si" with the subjunctive.

That'll teach me to work off memory, thanks.
Rìk oe lu hufwemì, nìn fya’ot a oe tswayon!

Offline Alìm Tsamsiyu

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
  • Karma: 15
  • Skxawng Makto
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #83 on: January 20, 2010, 05:25:55 pm »
Ayoengur vay set ke lu horen amuiä fpi lì'u kemä "kangkem" ta Karyu Pawl.[/b]
You-<TOP> up-to now not be rules correct for word-action "kangkem" from teacher Paul.

As of now, you don't have the correct rules for the verb "kangkem" from Prof. Paul.

Oh yeah - one little nitpick I forgot to mention :D

It would be We-DAT, not You-<TOP> for "Ayoengur."
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

Offline Keylstxatsmen

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • *
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: 20
    • Letrra Na'vi
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #84 on: January 20, 2010, 05:33:28 pm »
Ayoengur vay set ke lu horen amuiä fpi lì'u kemä "kangkem" ta Karyu Pawl.[/b]
You-<TOP> up-to now not be rules correct for word-action "kangkem" from teacher Paul.

As of now, you don't have the correct rules for the verb "kangkem" from Prof. Paul.

Oh yeah - one little nitpick I forgot to mention :D

It would be We-DAT, not You-<TOP> for "Ayoengur."

Yeah, I wrote that up quick as you can tell... :)

Quote
I got all that from his post, and yes I've been coming up with ways to make use of "yawn" as a noun, but it still doesn't explain his choice of listing it as "yawn" and not "tìyawn," and if that was his intention, why is tì- added?

I'm sure there is a reason, maybe the verb would be "yawn si" and the "si" can be deleted after it is abstracted by tì?  I don't know.

-Keyl
« Last Edit: January 20, 2010, 05:37:01 pm by Keylstxatsmen »
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!

Offline Alìm Tsamsiyu

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
  • Karma: 15
  • Skxawng Makto
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #85 on: January 20, 2010, 05:36:42 pm »

I'm sure there is a reason, maybe the verb would is "yawn si" and the "si" can be deleted after it is abstracted by tì?  I don't know.

-Keyl


Make love is the verb? Oh boy....   :o

I was thinking of "I have love for you" (although this rarely means "I love you" in English) or "You are my love."
Oeyä ayswizawri tswayon alìm ulte takuk nìngay.
My arrows fly far and strike true.

Offline Karyu Amawey

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Uniltìranyu
  • *****
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: 12
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #86 on: January 20, 2010, 05:37:54 pm »
What date are we expecting the pocket guide to be updated on?

Tonight :D
Oel ayngati kameie

Offline Keylstxatsmen

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • *
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: 20
    • Letrra Na'vi
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #87 on: January 20, 2010, 05:40:15 pm »
Make love is the verb? Oh boy....   :o

Or "love do" like Japanese 愛する ai suru

-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!

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #88 on: January 20, 2010, 05:43:31 pm »
I'm sure there is a reason, maybe the verb would be "yawn si" and the "si" can be deleted after it is abstracted by tì?  I don't know.
In things like "nari si", "kelku si" or "eltu si", the verb is actually just "si".
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Keylstxatsmen

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • *
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: 20
    • Letrra Na'vi
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #89 on: January 20, 2010, 05:49:14 pm »
I'm sure there is a reason, maybe the verb would be "yawn si" and the "si" can be deleted after it is abstracted by tì?  I don't know.
In things like "nari si", "kelku si" or "eltu si", the verb is actually just "si".

Yes, yes. But if someone asked me "what is the verb for live (dwell)" I would say: "kelku si".  Maybe that's not 100% accurate, but that is what I would say, they form a unit.  

-Keyl
« Last Edit: January 20, 2010, 05:53:44 pm by Keylstxatsmen »
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!

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #90 on: January 20, 2010, 06:08:17 pm »
Your only reason for calling it a verb as a unit is that it is a single verb in English.  In Na'vi, it's two words taken together.

For "I lived" you say "Kelku sami" - the infix goes in "si" because that is the verb.  You wouldn't then say "tìkelku si" for "a dwelling", you would just say "Kelku" because that is the noun which "Kelku si" is based on.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline LearntospeakNavi

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #91 on: January 20, 2010, 06:08:42 pm »
Tìtìng ta Eywa a fì'u oeru tse'a lu.

This is a gift from Eywa!

Lit: Gift from Eywa that this-thing I see to be.

Offline Keylstxatsmen

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • *
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: 20
    • Letrra Na'vi
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #92 on: January 20, 2010, 06:19:05 pm »
Your only reason for calling it a verb as a unit is that it is a single verb in English.  In Na'vi, it's two words taken together.

For "I lived" you say "Kelku sami" - the infix goes in "si" because that is the verb.  You wouldn't then say "tìkelku si" for "a dwelling", you would just say "Kelku" because that is the noun which "Kelku si" is based on.

Well, and being fluent in a language that does the exact same thing -- Japanese -- where many verbs are formed with NOUN+する(suru).  Again the verb for love in Japanese is 愛(ai:noun)する(suru:do), I would call this a verb.  Just because the ending inflects or in Latin characters you write them as two words, doesn't really matter to me, personally.

Also, tì- makes things abstract nouns.  This is important I think.  tìnari si would not be "an eye", because that is a concrete object, it would be "sight" (if we did not already have tìkame or tìtse'a).  We've never seen this done though, so who knows if it's legal.  But it seems like if there are a lot of verbs built in the noun+do construction, we would run into it at some point.

Just my opinion. :)

-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!

Offline Ftiafpi

  • Olo'eyktan
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 4759
  • Karma: 123
  • Plltxe 'eylan ulte fpxäkìm.
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #93 on: January 20, 2010, 06:23:31 pm »
Download the letter in mp3 format: http://www.archive.org/download/FrommerSpokenNavi/FrommerLetter.mp3

More audio stuff coming

Offline Keylstxatsmen

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • *
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: 20
    • Letrra Na'vi
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #94 on: January 20, 2010, 06:26:47 pm »
Okay, so it has to be tìyawn.  Confirmed by Prrton (he's probably typing as I speak), and we DON'T know how to use it as a verb yet.  

-Keyl
« Last Edit: January 20, 2010, 06:31:20 pm by Keylstxatsmen »
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!

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3074
  • Karma: 143
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #95 on: January 20, 2010, 06:35:53 pm »
mipa aylì'u 'upxareyä ta Karyu Pawl / new vocabulary from the message from Karyu Paul

Another word is hiding in the heading!
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #96 on: January 20, 2010, 06:38:43 pm »
Well, and being fluent in a language that does the exact same thing -- Japanese -- where many verbs are formed with NOUN+する(suru).  Again the verb for love in Japanese is 愛(ai:noun)する(suru:do), I would call this a verb.  Just because the ending inflects or in Latin characters you write them as two words, doesn't really matter to me, personally.

Also, tì- makes things abstract nouns.  This is important I think.  tìnari si would not be "an eye", because that is a concrete object, it would be "sight" (if we did not already have tìkame or tìtse'a).  We've never seen this done though, so who knows if it's legal.  But it seems like if there are a lot of verbs built in the noun+do construction, we would run into it at some point.

Just my opinion. :)

-Keyl
Be careful assuming that because Japanese has a similar construct that it is exactly the same.  I'm not just saying that it's a separate verb because I think it looks like it.  I'm saying because there's precedent for "si" being it's own verb (Kempe si nga - what are you doing, from Neytiri to Tsu'tey) and there's precedent for verbs in compound words still being considered seperate from the word as a whole (From the hunt song, yomtìyìng - will feed, or something like that where a first position infix goes into the last "syllable" of yomtìng because that's the acting verb).

Also, every word paired with "si" is itself a word of a different part of speech.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline txura utral

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Karma: 2
  • Kelutrelti leiu oel, sì reiey nìsirea ayfoyä oe.
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #97 on: January 20, 2010, 06:44:26 pm »
New words=LOTS of speculation  ;D
Na'viti ayngal nume, ayskxawng!
Learn your Na'vi, morons!

I apologize in advance for my grammar.

Offline suomichris

  • Omatikaya
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
  • Karma: 13
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #98 on: January 20, 2010, 06:44:58 pm »
No, progressive != imperfect!

"I have studied for 3 years." = Past perfect progressive
"By the time they arrive, we will have died of old age!" = Future Perfect
"I have been working on my car, and now my hands are dirty." = Present Perfect Progressive

It's a tough call, upon re-studying up on my tenses, it seems that "have heard" can be either one! If this were written in English it would more likely be interpreted as Present Perfect Progressive (since it indicates a "Recently finished activity with a present result").  But, since <ol> is known to be perfect tense (and not perfect progressive) the sentence CAN be Past Perfect tense (but then that begs the question: why Past?).

The only two possibilities for the tense of the English "have heard" are Present Perfect Progressive and Past Perfect.

Since present tense is unmarked in Na'vi, it would seem that this is the former, but what about Progressive? Unmarked also?
Since there is no marker for progressive you could argue that it is the latter, but then there is no mark for past either, so that wouldn't work at all.
Okay, whoa there... The problem here is that, in English classes, they don't use linguistic terminology, they use terms made up specifically for English.  This problem is confounded by the fact that tense and aspect are often pretty much inseparable in English.

Now, I'm not up on my English grammar terms (as they are not useful for anything except English, which I don't study), but here are your sentences again, with the linguistic terms for each:

No, progressive != imperfect!

"I have studied for 3 years." = Past perfect
"By the time they arrive, we will have died of old age!" = Future Perfect (same)
"I have been working on my car, and now my hands are dirty." = Past imperfect

Regardless, the Na'vi is clearly perfective, and sure, we can even say it's present, but it isn't a progressive/imperfective.

We do, though, have a past perfect in the letter: z<am><ol>unge

Offline roger

  • Taronyu
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • Karma: 22
Re: Language Update - a closer look at Dr. Frommer's letter
« Reply #99 on: January 20, 2010, 06:47:00 pm »
I'll try to answer the questions I can that haven't been covered yet.
Quote
awngeyä = our?  Why aw?
Both awnga and ayoeng would appear to be contractions of *ayoenga (pronounced "aywenga"). However, awnga tends to be shorter when inflected for case. WP now mentions that.

Quote
Shouldn't yawn be a verb?
Per Frommer, the noun tìyawn derives from yawne "beloved". The e drops, as it often does, though we don't know why, or where. I imagine that oe ngaru tìyawn si (or worse, oel ngati tìyawn si) would mean something like, "hey baby, come over here and I'll love you." If it's idiomatic to say it at all, which is dubious. Prrton and I both suspect that "I love you" might be worded nga oeru yawne leiu "you are beloved to/of me".

Quote
Derived *kangkem, the verb.
Kangkem would appear to be correct. Or at least I think so. Frommer says it's derived from kan [sic] "to aim" and kem.

Quote
Whoop, sorry, not future... "He has heard," the hearing is over and done with, thus perfective.
We can have perfectives in the future, if the action is complete in the future. Tense is irrelevant for aspect. (Well, theoretically. As just noted above, they're inseparable in English.)
« Last Edit: January 20, 2010, 06:54:21 pm by roger »

 

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

SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
| 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