Is a "mini-dictionary" of all short form and colloqual words of Na'vi desirable?

Started by Tìtstewan, January 25, 2013, 08:06:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is a "mini-dictionary" of all short form and colloqual words of Na'vi desirable?

Yes, it's desirable.
19 (82.6%)
No, it isn't desirable.
4 (17.4%)

Total Members Voted: 23

Tìtstewan

o.O I've fixed that mistake two days ago?!
I have uploaded this file again. It's correct now?

-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Plumps


Tìtstewan

Quote from: Plumps on August 23, 2013, 07:53:23 AM
Rutxe, sivung:
kefyak? comes from kefya srak? from ke fìfya srak?
Irayo! This will be added immediately!

-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tìtstewan


-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tirea Aean


Tìtstewan


-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tirea Aean


Tìtstewan

fwa (< fì'u a)    tsa'u a -> tsawa
fula (< fì'ul a)   tsa'ul a -> tsala
tsa'ut a -> tsata
??

-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tìtstewan

Quote from: Tìtstewan on August 23, 2013, 09:14:19 AM
fwa (< fì'u a)    tsa'u a -> tsawa
fula (< fì'ul a)   tsa'ul a -> tsala
tsa'ut a -> tsata
??
File has been updated. :)

-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Palulukan Maktoyu

Quote from: Tìtstewan on August 23, 2013, 09:36:41 AM
Quote from: Tìtstewan on August 23, 2013, 09:14:19 AM
fwa (< fì'u a)    tsa'u a -> tsawa
fula (< fì'ul a)   tsa'ul a -> tsala
tsa'ut a -> tsata
??
File has been updated. :)

i'll save you a post on the other thread for short forms ;) as i get notifications from this thread hrh
Fkol syaw oeru Palulukan Maktoyu Ta'lengean

Twitter: https://twitter.com/navi_wotd

Tìtstewan


-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Vawmataw

Fmawn Ta 'Rrta - News IN NA'VI ONLY (Discord)
Traducteur francophone de Kelutral.org, dict-navi et Reykunyu

Tìtstewan


-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Tirea Aean


Tìtstewan


-| Na'vi Vocab + Audio | Na'viteri as one HTML file | FAQ | Useful Links for Beginners |-
-| Kem si fu kem rä'ä si, ke lu tìfmi. |-

Mech

I think that sound changes are regular in languages and we can infer some rules from these simplifications. One attested simplification might  mean that it can be reproduced in other words too.

One rule is that Na'vi doesn't like the combinations rng and lng as in yayay(r)nga' and we have already two examples that säp- likes to be simplified to sp- in säpoli and säpivi. Perhaps not only  in si. 

Tirea Aean

Quote from: Mech on September 16, 2018, 09:09:16 PM
I think that sound changes are regular in languages and we can infer some rules from these simplifications. One attested simplification might  mean that it can be reproduced in other words too.

It really would be convenient if this was confirmed to be the case. Then we could reliably claim that all such changes X->Y occur, every time for every word that contains a certain sequence X, after the first we see such a change occur in one word. As it stands, I don't feel like we can assume that at this time.

Nasal assimilation, for example

We have lun + pe = lumpe (instead of lunpe) and such, yes.

But for nk -> ngk for example, we have only all these:


~>> /list word has nk
[1] zenke [ˈz·ɛŋ.kɛ] vim. must not (ii)
[2] txankrr [t'aŋ.ˈkṛ] adv. for a long time
[3] txonkrr [ˈt'on.kṛ] adv. at night
[4] tsankum [ˈt͡san.kum] n. advantage, benefit, upside, gain
[5] tsankumnga' [ˈt͡san.kum.ŋaʔ] adj. advantageous
[6] txankeltrrtrr [ˈt'an.kɛl.tṛ.tṛ] adj. extraordinary
[7] nìtxankeltrrtrr [nɪ.ˈt'an.kɛl.tṛ.tṛ] adv. extraordinarily
[8] srankehe [sɾan.ˈkɛ.hɛ] part., intj. more or less, somewhat, yes and no, kind of
[9] txe'lankong [t'ɛʔ.ˈlan.koŋ] n. heartbeat


We have to the contrary to a general rule of nasal assimilation, results 3-9 above. Only 1 and 2 actually follow the nasal assimilation nk -> ngk

For other changes, including spellings that don't match their pronunciations, we have:

ronsrelngop written as such yet pronounced as ronsrewngop,
leymkem written as such yet pronounced as leyngkem, and
txumnga' written as such yet pronounced as txunga'.

The statement given by KP on such cases (particularly zenke pronounced as zengke) is this:

Quote from: https://forum.learnnavi.org/language-updates/mustnt-vs-dont-need-to/msg106383/#msg106383
I realize I've been inconsistent in doing that, since I've spelled lumpe with an m rather than the underlying n. [...] But maybe a little inconsistency isn't the worst thing in the world.

Mech

ah thanks for assembling all these. Yea, this inconsistency makes no sense and needs an internal explanation. But as our topic is colloquial speech, this can be the explanation, and we can apply this logic in formal vs. colloquial speech: eg. that the colloquial pronunciation of txonkrr is *txongkrr, even though unattested.

I dont know if this matter has been addresed before, but i thnk that here we can see some diachronicity in the language. Eg. perhaps the form closer to etymology (like lunpe) is more formal or even "archaic", while the colloquial forms represent the present or even emerging trends in the language  :-\

Batureang 🦈

I say yes to every project someone is interested in doing.  1; start it early because it will be easier to update as new info comes out than to create once theres a lot of information.  and 2; the more learning resources there are, the easier it will be for some people to understand.  I've read the same info half a dozen times but this last version of it that I found has really clicked well with me.  If that version's writer had decided the info was already out there enough, I'd still be sitting here confused.