Txe'lanit Hivawl...

Started by Prrton, June 18, 2010, 04:44:36 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

`Eylan Ayfalulukanä

I'll take a different tack on this. Like Taronyu and kemeoauniaea, and as an amateur astronomer myself, I am quite aware of the likliehood that Pandora probably has a very interesting day/night cycle. I haven't checked on the spacing of Alpha Centuari A and B, but I bet they are distant enough that each star has its own planetary system. Although it is possible, stable orbits are few and far between for something orbiting both stars of a binary system. The aforementioned arrangement (orbiting one star) would make for a lot of 'light nights', where the other star provides twilight-like illumination much of the night.

The real complication though is that Pandora ia a moon of a gas giant planet. Gas giants normally have fast rotational periods. Depending on whether Pandora is tidally locked to Polyphemus, this makes for a very interesting arrangements of short days and nights, that vary considerably in length. In reality, this would create a much different situation for days/nights for Pandora that we have here on earth. The filmmakers missed this by a mile. (I do think, however, that there are one or more orbital mechanics solutions that would give Pandora a more or less regular day/night pattern.)

That said, the purpose of the film was to tell a story and communicate a message. Although a lot of details were attended to, apparently JC felt that trying to have a realistic day/night cycle was probably 'stretching things too far'. Therefore, the days and night as observed in the film are much like ours.

So, even though a very irregular day/night cycle is more likely, I will take at face value that it is more regular and adopt these terms to my conversational use. Although I know we have all discussed (especially this group of people) the appropriateness of some of these concepts (color is another one  ;) ), I think K. Pawl, as well as most of us, would like to have Na`vi be something we can use in our daily lives, or among friends to describe things we experience on a daily basis (Thus we have days of our week as words, etc.) I don't think this limits Na`vi in any significant way, as words describing finer details of things can be added as we go along.

At least in this case, K. Pawl did leave significant flexibility to address varying day lengths, but without a rigid time schedule like we use. I also think that by now, the Na`vi would have worked out the day/night pattern (which would be regularly recurring, but some components could take 'months' or 'years' to repeat) to a point where the 'astronomer' in their midst ( perhaps the Tsahìk) would have a pretty good idea how long or short a particular day or night will be. I also suspect that although the Na`vi's day/night behavior is similar to ours, that they are much more active at night than we are.

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

roger

"Gas giants normally have fast rotational periods"

Am I missing something? A couple of people have said this now, yet it's utterly irrelevant for light-dark cycles. All it means is that the storm spots of Polyphemus will cross the disk quickly; it will have no effect on the length of the Pandoran day, nor on the phases of Polyphemus lighting up the night, which will depend instead on Pandora's orbital period. Tidal locking of Pandora has nothing to do with the length of the Polyphemian day.

Ftiafpi

I believe they're referring to the fact that some moons are theorized to be created by accretion during formation of the planet and if I remember correctly this usually means that they inherit the angular momentum of their forming planet. It's either that or the impact theory that causes the similar angular momentum. Also, an accreted moon with share the angular momentum of it's parent planet so the rotational speed of the gas giant will have an effect on the orbital period of the moon so this would affect the phases of Polyphemus.

In any case, I do see where you're going.

Rain

Quote from: Taronyu on June 23, 2010, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: kemeoauniaea on June 23, 2010, 11:26:36 AM
Quote from: Rain on June 23, 2010, 11:12:27 AM
I'm saying you have a lot of extremely good points and I do have a working interest in Na'vi culture, Taronyu, but as far as getting all that information into the movie it would likely be a waste of time because nobody would notice it.

I don't know about Taronyu but, I agree with you about not being able to put it in the film, but it ought to be in the language, it seems weird to me for the Na'vi to only have word for the parts of their day/night/weird-stuff cycle that happens to be usable on earth.

I agree with this sentiment.

Oe mllte nìteng.
"If there are self-made purgatories, then we shall all have to live in them."
-Spock, "This Side of Paradise"

"The greatest danger about Pandora is that you may come to love it too much." ~Grace Augustine

roger

Quote from: Ftiafpi on June 23, 2010, 06:52:35 PM
I believe they're referring to the fact that some moons are theorized to be created by accretion during formation of the planet and if I remember correctly this usually means that they inherit the angular momentum of their forming planet. It's either that or the impact theory that causes the similar angular momentum. Also, an accreted moon with share the angular momentum of it's parent planet so the rotational speed of the gas giant will have an effect on the orbital period of the moon so this would affect the phases of Polyphemus.

In any case, I do see where you're going.

The Pandoran day is going to be its orbital period, assuming it's tidally locked. That will depend only on the mass and distance of Polyphemus. Because of the primary's radiation belts, Pandora would probably need to be fairly distant in order for it to be habitable. Io has a 42-hr orbit, yet that was still too close to Jupiter for Galileo to survive for long. (Galileo had to stay away from Io most of the time, and even close approaches to Europa were risky.) In the movie, there were several other largish moons inside the Pandoran orbit, too. Cf. the Jovians, the Ganymedean day is a terran week, and the Callistonian is 2 weeks.

Plumps

Quote from: Prrton on June 18, 2010, 04:44:36 PM
Alo & Fralo

  alo = time / turn / instance (c.f. Spanish «vez» compared to «tiempo» or French « fois » compared to « temps ».)

[...]

This is the same «lo» of 'awlo and melo (once, twice), but notice the stress shifts to «lo» in «aLO».

When using it as »once, twice, threetimes ...« is there another variant like »thrice«, kxawm *pxelo? or is it alo apxey from 3 onward?

Kì'eyawn

So, now that we have alo and its variants, i'm thinking we're all going to have to watch ourselves in how we use this versus krr—it seems to me, for example, that there are some subtle differences between fralo and frakrr, and i feel like at least for the English speakers (myself included) it's not always going to be easy to decide which to use.
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...

kewnya txamew'itan

I think the fralo/frakrr border would probably be along the lines of "at every opportunity" vs "all the time" mind you, you'd rarely say the first in natural English. Ah well...
Internet Acronyms Nìna'vi

hamletä tìralpuseng lena'vi sngolä'eiyi. tìkangkem si awngahu ro
http://bit.ly/53GnAB
The translation of Hamlet into Na'vi has started! Join with us at http://bit.ly/53GnAB

txo nga new oehu pivlltxe nìna'vi, nga oer 'eylan si mì fayspuk (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)
If you want to speak na'vi to me, friend me on facebook (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)

numena'viyä hapxì amezamkivohinve
learnnavi's

Muzer

#88
I would say fralo is more "every time/every instance" than "at every opportunity", to be used in conjunction with a to make subordinate clauses, as opposed to frakrr, which would be "all the time" and not used with a. For instance, from my translation:

Wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit fralo a oel sngeykä'i Operati

Or as per Frommer's example - when you've already referred to a set number of instances and you want to emphasise the fact that it's every one of those instances.
[21:42:56] <@Muzer> Apple products used to be good, if expensive
[21:42:59] <@Muzer> now they are just expensive

kewnya txamew'itan

I was struggling to put what I meant (I meant that fralo ~ todas veces whilst frakrr ~ siempre) into English, your explanation is better Muzer.

That said, I think that frakrr can be used with a and would be distinct from fralo in that frakrr would tend to be used with imperfective subordinate clauses because a 'when' is a more spread out thing than a 'time' (vez) and so when they take relative clauses I think that would be reflected so:

wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit fralo a oel sngeykä'i Operati
wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit frakrr a oel sngeykerä'i Operati

The distinction, as with all of the alo words, doesn't translate well, but I hope that shows roughly what I mean.
Internet Acronyms Nìna'vi

hamletä tìralpuseng lena'vi sngolä'eiyi. tìkangkem si awngahu ro
http://bit.ly/53GnAB
The translation of Hamlet into Na'vi has started! Join with us at http://bit.ly/53GnAB

txo nga new oehu pivlltxe nìna'vi, nga oer 'eylan si mì fayspuk (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)
If you want to speak na'vi to me, friend me on facebook (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)

numena'viyä hapxì amezamkivohinve
learnnavi's

Prrton

Quote from: kemeoauniaea on June 24, 2010, 12:10:37 PM
I was struggling to put what I meant (I meant that fralo ~ todas veces whilst frakrr ~ siempre) into English, your explanation is better Muzer.

That said, I think that frakrr can be used with a and would be distinct from fralo in that frakrr would tend to be used with imperfective subordinate clauses because a 'when' is a more spread out thing than a 'time' (vez) and so when they take relative clauses I think that would be reflected so:

wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit fralo a oel sngeykä'i Operati
wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit frakrr a oel sngeykerä'i Operati

The distinction, as with all of the alo words, doesn't translate well, but I hope that shows roughly what I mean.

I just confirmed this with K. Pawl to be doubly sure before I posted this (and sorry, the confirmation is not via an e-mail that I can post):


fraloeach/every time (discrete instances)[es]: cada vez
frakrralways/at all times (generally/consistently predictable)[es]: todo el tiempo
tì'i'avay krrä  "forever" (poetic, lit: "until the end of time")  [es]: por eternidad

Prrton

Quote from: Lance R. Casey on June 18, 2010, 05:10:33 PM
Quote from: Prrton on June 18, 2010, 04:44:36 PM
This might keep some of you busy!   ;D

Nìngay nang! :o

Only skimmed it so far, but this stood out:

Quote from: Prrton on June 18, 2010, 04:44:36 PM
Alo & Fralo

...
      (1) Alo amrr poan polawm, slä fralo poe poltxe san kehe.

           "He asked five times, but each time she said, 'no.'"

...

This is the same «lo» of 'awlo and melo (once, twice), but notice the stress shifts to «lo» in «aLO».

Are we to assume, then, that anything above "twice" is rendered with two words, instead of a suffix? I would at least have expected *pxelo...

'awlo = once (one discrete time)
melo = twice (two discrete times)
pxelo = thrice (three discrete times)

alo atsìng (tsìnga alo) = 4 discrete times
alo amrr (mrra alo) = 5 discrete times
etc...

It is also possible to say «alo apxey» or «alo a'aw nì'aw!!», etc. in order to add extra stress to the importance of the number of times when «'awlo, melo, pxelo» might be typically expected.

Numbers above 3 (pxe-) do not combine with with «alo» thereby reducing the initial «a».

Sorry, I don't have a mail to quote, but may get one later with answers to the other questions above.

Kì'eyawn

Txantsan, irayo, ma Prrton.  This helps a lot.  So, it seems it would be fair to say alo is more discrete, whil krr is more continuous... sorta.
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...

kewnya txamew'itan

Quote from: Prrton on June 24, 2010, 01:14:46 PM
Quote from: kemeoauniaea on June 24, 2010, 12:10:37 PM
I was struggling to put what I meant (I meant that fralo ~ todas veces whilst frakrr ~ siempre) into English, your explanation is better Muzer.

That said, I think that frakrr can be used with a and would be distinct from fralo in that frakrr would tend to be used with imperfective subordinate clauses because a 'when' is a more spread out thing than a 'time' (vez) and so when they take relative clauses I think that would be reflected so:

wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit fralo a oel sngeykä'i Operati
wìntxu oeyä kelkuä pamrelit frakrr a oel sngeykerä'i Operati

The distinction, as with all of the alo words, doesn't translate well, but I hope that shows roughly what I mean.

I just confirmed this with K. Pawl to be doubly sure before I posted this (and sorry, the confirmation is not via an e-mail that I can post):


fraloeach/every time (discrete instances)[es]: cada vez
frakrralways/at all times (generally/consistently predictable)[es]: todo el tiempo
tì'i'avay krrä  "forever" (poetic, lit: "until the end of time")  [es]: por eternidad

Gah, Spanish fail on my part, forgot that cada would be better.

I take it then that both can be used with relative clauses then, a better example of what I meant would be:

oe rol fralo a taron
oe rol frakrr a taron (although I'd expect <er> in one of those verbs).

Also, I take this as confirmation that fra- = each and every.
Internet Acronyms Nìna'vi

hamletä tìralpuseng lena'vi sngolä'eiyi. tìkangkem si awngahu ro
http://bit.ly/53GnAB
The translation of Hamlet into Na'vi has started! Join with us at http://bit.ly/53GnAB

txo nga new oehu pivlltxe nìna'vi, nga oer 'eylan si mì fayspuk (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)
If you want to speak na'vi to me, friend me on facebook (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)

numena'viyä hapxì amezamkivohinve
learnnavi's

Kemaweyan

Quote from: kemeoauniaea on June 24, 2010, 04:44:59 PM
Also, I take this as confirmation that fra- = each and every.

Oel frakrr tsafya nì'aw tsat tslamam ;) Slä oel tse'a tìketengit mìkam san frakrr sìk sì san fralo sìk. Fpìl oel futa san frakrr sìk tsun fko sivar tsakemteri a lu kea sìftang. Ngian tsunslu mì ayralo tenga ral tsamelì'u a fì'u lam oer :)

Nìngay fìlì'olo'mì fko zenke pivlltxe san oel fralo tsafya nì'aw tsat tslamam ::)
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

its the differnence between every time and always...

He does this Every time she does that.

the above scenario always happens.

Kemaweyan

Quote from: Tirea Aean on June 24, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
its the differnence between every time and always...

Yeah :) I think,

Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe fralo ngaru srung sami = Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe frakrr ngaru srung sami.

But

Ngari oe frrakrr zerok - is correct, and Ngari oe frralo zerok - is incorrect.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

Quote from: Kemaweyan on June 24, 2010, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on June 24, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
its the differnence between every time and always...

Yeah :) I think,

Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe fralo ngaru srung sami = Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe frakrr ngaru srung sami.

But

Ngari oe frrakrr zerok - is correct, and Ngari oe frralo zerok - is incorrect.

Why?

I can see how, but if there was the right context, the second one could be correct, if the difference really IS always(all the time) vs. every time...

I remember you every time (i see this thing that reminds me of you)

I always remember you (because i have this thing that I look at that reminds me of you.)

kewnya txamew'itan

Quote from: Tirea Aean on June 24, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
its the differnence between every time and always...

He does this Every time she does that.

the above scenario always happens.

I think there's a bit more to it than that. I think {clause A fralo {a clause B}} would be that clause A happens at some point whilst clause B happens every time that clause B happens; this is in contrast with {clause A frakrr {a clause B}} which would be that clause A happens all the time that clause B happens.

Quote from: Kemaweyan on June 24, 2010, 07:03:24 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on June 24, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
its the differnence between every time and always...

Yeah :) I think,

Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe fralo ngaru srung sami = Nga ätxäle sami a krr, oe frakrr ngaru srung sami.

But

Ngari oe frrakrr zerok - is correct, and Ngari oe frralo zerok - is incorrect.

You're over simplifying this, I'll assume the Spanish has been confirmed by Frommer even if it hasn't originally come from him, in which case either of your final sentences would be correct (although I'd usually expect a relative clause on fralo but it could be implied by the discourse).

And for your first two sentences, they aren't the same, they have distinct meanings, the first would be that "I helped you every time you asked" (which I think is the original English sentence more or less) whilst the second is "at the time that you asked/requested I always helped you" telling the listener that in the past you always helped them, the past tense here implies you don't anymore and implies that there's been some disagreement, whereas the first sentence could be perfectly amicable.

Quote from: Tirea Aean on June 24, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
its the differnence between every time and always...

He does this Every time she does that.

the above scenario always happens.

Almost, it's more "every time" = fralo and "all the time" = frakrr (assuming the Spanish is accurate).
Internet Acronyms Nìna'vi

hamletä tìralpuseng lena'vi sngolä'eiyi. tìkangkem si awngahu ro
http://bit.ly/53GnAB
The translation of Hamlet into Na'vi has started! Join with us at http://bit.ly/53GnAB

txo nga new oehu pivlltxe nìna'vi, nga oer 'eylan si mì fayspuk (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)
If you want to speak na'vi to me, friend me on facebook (http://bit.ly/bp9fwf)

numena'viyä hapxì amezamkivohinve
learnnavi's

Prrton

Quote from: kemeoauniaea on June 25, 2010, 02:10:39 AM

...I'll assume the Spanish has been confirmed by Frommer even if it hasn't originally come from him,...

Confirmed. Yes. Via French « fois/temps » and Spanish «vez/tiempo» as the root distinction.