Author Topic: mustn't vs. don't need to  (Read 1867 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline roger

  • Taronyu
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • Karma: 22
mustn't vs. don't need to
« on: February 19, 2010, 05:12:39 pm »
A question came up, I forget where, of whether zene ke / ke zene meant "must not" or "don't need to". Well, we got our answer without asking. (At least, I didn't ask in this email.) Also some new words.

Quote from: Frommer
Sìltsan nìtxan. Tìng nari nekll.

:[That is, "See below", where he interlaced his answers w my questions, which I'll put in italics. Comments I'm adding now are in brackets.]
 
[embedded email]

:Did I get this right?

:Hém geyä zégke fkóru livú cá(y)hem a gáru pŕrte' ke lú.

:[this was the Golden Rule]

Very fine. I’ve spelled it zenke, even though it’s pronounced with a velar nasal. And I realize I’ve been inconsistent in doing that, since I’ve spelled lumpe with an m rather than the underlying n. Was probably influenced by English (“impossible,” but “income”). But maybe a little inconsistency isn’t the worst thing in the world.

BTW, zenke and ke zene are semantically distinct:

Nga zenke kivä! ‘You must not go!’

Nga ke zene kivä. ‘It’s not obligatory (OR: it’s not a must) that you go.’

And how many people have adopted the “scientific” transcription? It’s nice to see it, although I don’t think it will ever become as popular as the “official” one. (Notice what happens when you write Tsu’tey in scientific. NOT a good association with that character. <g>)

:and is zegke short for zene ke ?

:This one seems clear:

:lǐ'fyari leNá'vi Ŕrtamì vay sét 'almóg a frá'u zerá'u ta gŕrpogu

:assuming Rrta for "Earth"; confirms grr "root" and past pfv. I assume future pfv would be 'alyog.

Right. As you now know, it’s ‘Rrta.
So, he seems to be accepting <aly> for future subjunctive.

Unfortunately, I think I should leave out the next bit in English for now; it's not of much interest anyway except for the new vocab:

Quote
maw (ADP-) = after (time)

hìkrr (stress on 1st) = second, very short time

tätxaw (stress in 2nd) = return (intrans.)

Maw hìkrr ayoe tìyätxaw.

I've suggested this before, and it now seems that Frommer would like it: Why not switch to the c, g orthography at this intermediate level? His concern is accessibility, which is why he's requested that the Wiktionary appendix be kept with ts, ng, but that's not really an issue at our level, it is? No more difficult that Fijian spelling!

The Golden Rule, BTW, is called korén a'awve tìruséyä 'awsitég "the first rule of living together" (stress shifted on a'awve, so I can't say which is correct). Don't know if it's supposed to be a traditional Na'vi saying or not.

Some attributive forms, my transcription:

    snúmìnä skxáwg [at least, I can't hear an 'a' after snúmìnä; it might be there], skxáwg asnúmìnä
    skxáwg apxá, apxá skxáwg [this is confirmed in writing]
    skxáwg ayáwne, yáwnea skxawg [answers old questions about the nature of 'beloved']
    pxeskxékeg atxáncan, txáncana pxeskxékeg [pronounced "txansan"]
« Last Edit: February 19, 2010, 05:32:01 pm by roger »

Offline Nìwotxkrr Tìyawn

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • Posts: 1902
  • Karma: 46
  • Watch AVATAR, or I'll find you. ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2010, 05:19:56 pm »
personally I like the "ts" and "ng", I do of course understand the other ways of showing them but I feel it is much nicer to look at when using them. It's all a matter of choice in the end.
Naruto Shippuden Episode 166: Confession
                                    Watch it, Love it, Live it

Offline NeotrekkerZ

  • Taronyu
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Karma: 40
  • Nume ralit lì'fyayä ulte nga tayìran Eywahu.
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2010, 05:46:06 pm »
personally I like the "ts" and "ng", I do of course understand the other ways of showing them but I feel it is much nicer to look at when using them. It's all a matter of choice in the end.

I have to echo this sentiment as it's easier for me to see the phonetics this way, but it really isn't a big deal.
Rìk oe lu hufwemì, nìn fya’ot a oe tswayon!

Offline Kì'eyawn

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 1779
  • Karma: 32
  • Oeru syaw "tigermind" kop.
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2010, 05:56:19 pm »
Well, some of this is over my head; but at the very least, the info re zenke vs. ke zene answers an important question.

Does that mean there's also *tsunke and *newke?
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...

Swoka Swizaw

  • Guest
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2010, 06:05:46 pm »
Yeah...no! I cannot bring myself to use an ortho' that makes Na'vi look unnatural (but that's just me). I'm glad that "ts, ng" are so popular...

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2010, 06:47:49 pm »
I actually prefer the single letter notation, I took it to an extreme when I was trying to make crossword puzzles that combined digraphs into one cell...  Specifically, I assigned unused letters to the ejectives by going with the voiced consonant version of the letter, with q for k since g is already taken.  (IE tx->d, px->b and kx->q.)  But that was more out of necessity than out of desire for a shorthand.

Fko cun clam fì'ut ftue.  Lu gay fwa kin fko nivume 'awve...
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Eight

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Karma: 19
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2010, 06:56:57 pm »
I can't really see the point of changing - this is not the orthography of Na'vi, so we're not concerned with being faithful to the language - just about representing sounds. Which the current system does fine and we're all used to it.

And think of poor Taronyu - having to go through and change that whole dictionary. :D Maybe wait and see what transcription system Dr. Frommer puts into the "glossary" when it's published, before we make a call on this one.

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2010, 06:59:24 pm »
Meh, changing is a simple search & replace w/ the help of regular expressions. :)  It's not really a huge change in notation really for ts->c and ng->g.  I imagine anything published for the masses would use the common form not the scientific form, simply for accessibility to beginners.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Eight

  • Tute
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Karma: 19
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2010, 07:01:41 pm »
It's not really a huge change in notation really for ts->c and ng->g.  I imagine anything published for the masses would use the common form not the scientific form, simply for accessibility to beginners.
Well even dafter than changing forms, would be having two with such tiny differences. :)

Point taken about the REs. Lol.

Offline Nawmaritie

  • 'Eveng
  • ***
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: 10
  • oeyä txìmìl txana ayeltut ngop
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #9 on: February 20, 2010, 11:38:09 am »
Ah, very cool

I was the one asking (here in the forum, not by email ;) ) about the negation of zene (here's the thread)

so now it's:
nga zene kivä
  you must go, you have to go
nga zenke kivä
  you mustn't go, you are not allowed to go
nga ke zene kivä
  you don't have to go, you don't need to go

I like that :)
« Last Edit: February 20, 2010, 11:40:54 am by Nawmaritie »
ke'u tsatìfkeyuyä hapxìmungwrr
a frakrr tìkawngit neiew mivunge
slä tìsìltsanit ngop nì'aw frakrr

Na'vi-Deutsch Wörterbuch
Deutsch-Na'vi Wörterbuch

Offline roger

  • Taronyu
  • ****
  • Posts: 724
  • Karma: 22
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #10 on: February 20, 2010, 01:48:41 pm »
Ah, very cool

I was the one asking (here in the forum, not by email ;) ) about the negation of zene (here's the thread)

so now it's:
nga zene kivä
  you must go, you have to go
nga zenke kivä
  you mustn't go, you are not allowed to go
nga ke zene kivä
  you don't have to go, you don't need to go

I like that :)

When I said 'email', I meant my email to Frommer that got the above response. I hadn't asked about this in that email, though I may have in the past (I don't remember). But F supplied it anyway, because it was relevant to my translation.

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3074
  • Karma: 143
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #11 on: February 20, 2010, 01:51:23 pm »
I've suggested this before, and it now seems that Frommer would like it: Why not switch to the c, g orthography at this intermediate level?

Three months ago I would have agreed 100%.   Right now it seems like a really bad idea.  Either all our information in Na'vi should use the c/g orthography, or none should.  Switching to c/g isn't advanced — the switch is, as you say, trivial — it's merely annoying to someone used to reading Na'vi in the ts/ng way, with no significant benefit resulting from that irritation.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline Prrton

  • Eyktan
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 2799
  • Karma: 105
  • Rutxe, fmivi. Ftxey fra'u eyawr fuke, ke tsranten.
    • Pìlok leNa'vi a ro MaSempul.org
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2010, 07:40:19 pm »
I've suggested this before, and it now seems that Frommer would like it: Why not switch to the c, g orthography at this intermediate level?

Three months ago I would have agreed 100%.   Right now it seems like a really bad idea.  Either all our information in Na'vi should use the c/g orthography, or none should.  Switching to c/g isn't advanced — the switch is, as you say, trivial — it's merely annoying to someone used to reading Na'vi in the ts/ng way, with no significant benefit resulting from that irritation.

I AGREE that switching would not only be annoying (for me) but I think that it would (in a dangerously difficult to quantify way) likely "raise the bar" to entry at this point for beginners. K. Pawl is right. Cu'tey is an abomination from the point of view of the uninitiated. It is easier to type than Tsu'tey, by just a touch, but I DON'T LIKE IT. It does not seem helpful in any way when faced with the massive undertaking that is effecting the realization of « 'Ivong Na'vi ». Even the spelling of THAT would change. Am I 100% down with "c" for cóng for 从/從 in pinyin? Yes! Do consider it beneficial in any way to the Na'vi-learning community right now? NO. « KEHE, hrr a1000 (vozam) !!! »

Offline Nawmaritie

  • 'Eveng
  • ***
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: 10
  • oeyä txìmìl txana ayeltut ngop
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2010, 07:56:46 pm »
[...]
I was the one asking (here in the forum, not by email ;) ) about the negation of zene (here's the thread)
[...]

When I said 'email', I meant my email to Frommer that got the above response. I hadn't asked about this in that email, though I may have in the past (I don't remember). But F supplied it anyway, because it was relevant to my translation.

I know :) I just added the words in the brackets, because I had the impression that otherwise it sounded like I wrote an eMail regarding that topic. I'm always not sure whether it comes across what I want to say in English, so I tend to add too much stuff ;)
ke'u tsatìfkeyuyä hapxìmungwrr
a frakrr tìkawngit neiew mivunge
slä tìsìltsanit ngop nì'aw frakrr

Na'vi-Deutsch Wörterbuch
Deutsch-Na'vi Wörterbuch

Offline Plumps

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 6107
  • Karma: 221
  • ’Ivong Na’vi
    • Aylì'uä Ramunong (Pìlok)
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2010, 07:59:38 pm »
I AGREE that switching would not only be annoying (for me) but I think that it would (in a dangerously difficult to quantify way) likely "raise the bar" to entry at this point for beginners. K. Pawl is right. Cu'tey is an abomination from the point of view of the uninitiated. It is easier to type than Tsu'tey, by just a touch, but I DON'T LIKE IT. It does not seem helpful in any way when faced with the massive undertaking that is effecting the realization of « 'Ivong Na'vi ». Even the spelling of THAT would change. Am I 100% down with "c" for cóng for 从/從 in pinyin? Yes! Do consider it beneficial in any way to the Na'vi-learning community right now? NO. « KEHE, hrr a1000 (vozam) !!! »
Another point to consider is the search function...

I use that neat tool a lot - not only here but also at the Canon site of the Learn Na'vi Wiki - it's a great way to find what you're looking for. Just a few moments ago I tried to find the word for "root" and couldn't find it because I typed in ngrr instead of grr
Changing the spelling would mean that one has to think every possible way how a word may be written.
I think most people are used to the 'official' spelling by now - changing it would also confuse a lot of newbies to the side and the language.

Just my 2c

Offline tawway

  • Ketuwong
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Karma: 0
Re: mustn't vs. don't need to
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2010, 08:35:16 pm »
I AGREE that switching would not only be annoying (for me) but I think that it would (in a dangerously difficult to quantify way) likely "raise the bar" to entry at this point for beginners. K. Pawl is right. Cu'tey is an abomination from the point of view of the uninitiated. It is easier to type than Tsu'tey, by just a touch, but I DON'T LIKE IT. It does not seem helpful in any way when faced with the massive undertaking that is effecting the realization of « 'Ivong Na'vi ». Even the spelling of THAT would change. Am I 100% down with "c" for cóng for 从/從 in pinyin? Yes! Do consider it beneficial in any way to the Na'vi-learning community right now? NO. « KEHE, hrr a1000 (vozam) !!! »
Another point to consider is the search function...

I use that neat tool a lot - not only here but also at the Canon site of the Learn Na'vi Wiki - it's a great way to find what you're looking for. Just a few moments ago I tried to find the word for "root" and couldn't find it because I typed in ngrr instead of grr
Changing the spelling would mean that one has to think every possible way how a word may be written.
I think most people are used to the 'official' spelling by now - changing it would also confuse a lot of newbies to the side and the language.

Just my 2c


"ts" and "ng" have been used to "romanise" a number of languages and do the job quite well. People will recognize them and get the sounds about right. And that's really the point here isn't it? Easier and more accurate for most people.

It worked for the actors too, didn't it? If it works don't mess with it  :)

 

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