vocab convenience (from "Diminutives; Conversational Expressions")

[wm.annis]

A new blog post from Frommer today, a long one.  It seems useful to summarize a few quick things, mostly vocabulary:

From the diminutive suffix discussion (-tsyìp, unaccented, fully productive with a few caveats):

 puktsyìp n. booklet, pamphlet
 utraltsyìp n. bush
 säspxintsyìp n. minor ailment
 tswin n. queue (people have been waiting on this one for a while)
 atanvi n. ray (of light, atan)

From the polite phrases discussion:

 hayalo adv. next time
 hamalo adv. last time
 tstunwi adj. kind, thoughtful, considerate
 seykxel adj. strong ("inner strength, a quiet feeling of confidence in one's own capability")

One funky and one extraordinary piece of grammar:

First, if a noun or pronoun of location immediately follows the verb, you can drop the adposition of destination, ne.  So, po zola'u fìtsengne or po zola'u fìtseng, but not *po fìtseng zola'u.

Inalienable possession makes its appearance,

Note that in sentences like this that involve possession, especially "inalienable possession, the –ri form (i.e. the topic marker) is slightly more idiomatic than the possessive pronoun, although both are correct. So "Ngeyä tswintsyìp . . ." is fine, although many Na'vi would prefer to say "Ngari . . .")

For the non-linguists, inalienable possession is possession of those things which are intrinsically yours, and in theory at least cannot be given away or taken.  In most languages that have this, blood relatives are the inalienable possessa par excellence.  Na'vi includes body parts, which is also quite common in Human languages.  Again, it's not unusual for Human languages to mark alienable and inalienable possession differently.  In Navajo, for example, inalienable nouns must always occur with a possessive prefix.  One cannot speak of "mothers" in general, you must talk about shimá my mother, nimá your mother or, at the very least, amá someone's mother.

[Plumps]

Thanks so much, ma William for that extraction.
Very interesting stuff, indeed.

One minor typo, though

 säspxintsyìp n. minor ailment

Should be säspxintsyìp, right?

[kewnya txamew'itan]

That would explain Eytukan's line about Jake's smell. That also clears up (as in eliminates) one use of the topical I'd thought about which, given its confused nature, can only be a good thing.

[wm.annis]

Should be säspxintsyìp, right?

Yep.  Fixed.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Just read the whole thing now.

This is a very useful update, particularly the phrases as the end, irayo ngaru ma wm.annis for bringing this to my attention.

[Ftiafpi]

That would explain Eytukan's line about Jake's smell. That also clears up (as in eliminates) one use of the topical I'd thought about which, given its confused nature, can only be a good thing.

Wait, it does? I didn't think we even had the full line for that.

[wm.annis]

Hmm.  This use of the topical gives a little light, and little more confusion, to some lines from the hunt song:

oeyä swizaw nìngay tivakuk Let my arrow strike true
oeyä tukrul txe'lanit tivakuk the my spear strike the heart
oeri tìngayìl txe'lanit tivakuk let the truth strike my heart
oeyä txe'lan livu ngay let my heart be true

The third line seems clearer now, but that just leaves the fourth.  Verse has rules of its own, though.  It cannot flout grammar, but it may lean in particular directions.

[wm.annis]

I suppose we should also note that people clamoring for something other than just kìyevame to say on leave taking now have hayalovay, until next time.

[wm.annis]

That would explain Eytukan's line about Jake's smell. That also clears up (as in eliminates) one use of the topical I'd thought about which, given its confused nature, can only be a good thing.

Wait, it does? I didn't think we even had the full line for that.

We have a full version from the Language Log post, oeri ta peyä fahew akewong ontu teya längu.

[Taronyu]

As I said on the blog:

I find it really interesting that tì- -us- is entirely productive, when we know already that tì- isn't an entirely productive nominalizing prefix. I wonder if it is the same for tì- -awn-, as the passive participle. So, from tìtusaron 'hunting' we might get tìtawnaron – the act of being hunted, so 'fleeing'. Or tìkawnar 'being taught', 'listening/learning'. Obviously it would not work with all words, such as 'ong – tì'usong makes perfect sense, but what of tì'awnong – being bloomed? That would assume an agent, which doesn't really here. This sort of sub-lexical semantic question highlights some of the complexity of Na'vi verbs that we (the lì'fyaolo') hasn't really gotten into much yet, as far as I'm aware.

I also wonder if utraltsyìpvi works for the branch on the bush, or perhaps spxamtsyìpvi – the mushroom sprout from a deeper, subterranean structure. These would probably contrast with utralvitsyìp and spxamvitsyìp, as well.

Finally, how would Jake say "my little Neytiri?" Neytirtsyìp? Neytsyìp? I wonder...

Fra'u oeyä eltur tìtxen si!

Needless to say, all of this is now in the dictionary. Including the phrases.

Edit: stupid spelling error.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I wonder if we can now use the diminutive form of a person (for whom the dimunitive would normally be inappropriate)'s name as a slight indicator of sarcasm. It seems to me that playing up your pall-y-ness could easily have this effect (that's not to say it's the case though).

Finally, how would Jake say "my little Neytiri?" Neytirtsyìng? Neytsyìng? I wonder...

I'd assume Jake can say either although I'd probably go with Neytsyìng.

[Kemaweyan]

Irayo nìtxan. Fra'u lu law nìwotx

[Ftiafpi]

My comment and question I posted on there was this:

Now, I assume the "responding to thanks" forms are colloquial? If that is the case, does the full form follow similar to "ngaru seiyi irayo" where we should put the topic suffix on the subject we are saying "you're welcome" for?

[Kì'eyawn]

Ma william, fìtìkangkemìri ngaru irayo seiyi oe.  I'm especially grateful for the explanation of inalienable possession; that wasn't a familiar concept to me.

[wm.annis]

I wonder if we can now use the diminutive form of a person (for whom the dimunitive would normally be inappropriate)'s name as a slight indicator of sarcasm.

Diminutives aren't sarcastic — they're demeaning.  Sarcasm would be using grandiose terms for someone not entitled to them.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Frommer hints that tone of voice and body language still influence how they are interpreted so, whilst that'd be what you'd expect, surely it might not always be the case. That said, ngaru tsulfä lu (do we know if we can use it in contexts other than responding to irayo?) so I'll bow to that.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Some great new stuff here! I am thrilled we finally have tswin!

We can now also derive 'cat' - palulukantsyìp Was it Wm Annis who was looking for pet terms?

Is a term  like Neytiritsìng intended to be a term of endearment, or something that is meant in a more sarcastic way? I seem to think the former, from the tone of the discussion here. The term 'demeaning' has a negative connotation to it. So, I am not sure that would be a good term to use to describe the effect ot -tsyìng if indeed Neytiritsìng is a term of endearment.

Finally, I have seen the use of the terminology 'fully productive' and 'not fully productive' used here and there on this board. What exactly does this mean or imply?

[Kä'eng]

Where is -tsyìng defined? I only see -tsyìp in the post.

[Muzer]

Finally, I have seen the use of the terminology 'fully productive' and 'not fully productive' used here and there on this board. What exactly does this mean or imply?

He explained those terms in the blog post - "fully productive" means that you can apply it to any word you want and you'll always get something completely predictable.

Not fully productive means that if you apply it to a word, you don't know for sure what you will get (though you can often have a good idea of what you'll get), if it means anything at all - so you shouldn't really apply these to random words unless the version with the prefix/suffix is already in the dictionary.

[Plumps]

Where is -tsyìng defined? I only see -tsyìp in the post.

I think that's a typo by Taronyu — appears already in his reply to the blog post. It's a strange phenomenon, really, because at the moment, -tsyìp won't come naturally to me either ... either it becomes *-tsìp or *-tsìng in my mouth