Hi Fark.com!

Payoang · December 21, 2009, 04:21:00 AM

Well, that was fast: http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4873888

Eywayä mokri · December 21, 2009, 04:23:10 AM

As I am not an english native speaker, I don't understand it so wel....was it a good or a bad news?^^

HawkPidgeon · December 21, 2009, 04:36:30 AM

Lol... hilarious. Who ratted us out?

Brainiac · December 21, 2009, 04:38:31 AM

Not me, but the post encouraged me to translate the 'if you can read this, you're probably still a virgin'-sentence :p
I couldn't resist.

HawkPidgeon · December 21, 2009, 04:40:37 AM

I got:

Ngal tslam txo fì'u, ngal virgin lu.

I omitted "probably" and borrowed "virgin".

Brainiac · December 21, 2009, 04:45:35 AM

I got:
Txo ngati tslam fi'u ngati kawkrr muntxaka omolumka
if you understand this you never mated(negative) know(past tense - negative)
if you understand this, have probably (as in "it is not known") not mated.

Elysio · December 21, 2009, 05:28:21 AM

Quote from: Eywa-ri 'eveng on December 21, 2009, 04:23:10 AM
As I am not an english native speaker, I don't understand it so wel....was it a good or a bad news?^^

I couldn't say that bad... We were just called high-leveled geeks

And we are, because no one is telling you the meaning, they're all trying to actually translate it ! xD

Brainiac · December 21, 2009, 05:29:36 AM

Quote from: Elysio on December 21, 2009, 05:28:21 AM
Quote from: Eywa-ri 'eveng on December 21, 2009, 04:23:10 AM
As I am not an english native speaker, I don't understand it so wel....was it a good or a bad news?^^

I couldn't say that bad... We were just called high-leveled geeks
And we are, because no one is telling you the meaning, they're all trying to actually translate it ! xD

teehee ^_^

Eywayä mokri · December 21, 2009, 05:37:38 AM

Oh oh I see. ^^ Thanks.

Karyu Amawey · December 21, 2009, 11:26:56 AM

I think anyone who needs to poke fun at another group who are actively engaging in developing a social trend really just have low self esteem issues that we don''t even need to concern ourselves with.

rey nulkrr na''vi!

Nayumeie · December 21, 2009, 06:40:24 PM

Quote from: Brainiac on December 21, 2009, 04:45:35 AM
I got:
Txo ngati tslam fi'u ngati kawkrr muntxaka omolumka
if you understand this you never mated(negative) know(past tense - negative)
if you understand this, have probably (as in "it is not known") not mated.

Isn't "ngati" the accusative form?

HawkPidgeon · December 21, 2009, 06:50:35 PM

Quote from: Nayumeie on December 21, 2009, 06:40:24 PM
Quote from: Brainiac on December 21, 2009, 04:45:35 AM
I got:
Txo ngati tslam fi'u ngati kawkrr muntxaka omolumka
if you understand this you never mated(negative) know(past tense - negative)
if you understand this, have probably (as in "it is not known") not mated.

Isn't "ngati" the accusative form?

I still don't even understand what "accusative" means in linguistics. Or many other terms, for that matter...

Is anyone here up for making a simple glossary of linguistics terms?

wm.annis · December 21, 2009, 06:52:31 PM

Quote from: HawkPidgeon on December 21, 2009, 06:50:35 PM
Is anyone here up for making a simple glossary of linguistics terms?

It is in my brain to write up some of this terminology — and the vocabulary for verbs, which will be the real brain-ache for most people — in the next few days, to go with my two intros to pronunciation.

Elysio · December 21, 2009, 06:55:17 PM

Aha, i think someone will have to make us a recall of all the cases used.

About the sentence : yes, ngati is the accusative form, which means that "you" is the direct object of the verb.

HawkPidgeon · December 21, 2009, 06:59:14 PM

Quote from: Elysio on December 21, 2009, 06:55:17 PM
Aha, i think someone will have to make us a recall of all the cases used.

About the sentence : yes, ngati is the accusative form, which means that "you" is the direct object of the verb.

So does accusative simply mean that something's the direct object?

wm.annis · December 21, 2009, 07:10:13 PM

Quote from: HawkPidgeon on December 21, 2009, 06:59:14 PMSo does accusative simply mean that something's the direct object?

Yes, but... (there's always but...)

In many languages the accusative case can get used for other things. However, Frommer doesn't actually call it an accusative in his Language Log post, but the "patientive." To me, that means it's going to be less like an accusative that just a direct object.

HawkPidgeon · December 21, 2009, 10:14:31 PM

I am once again confused D:

Thanks for the help though

Brainiac · December 22, 2009, 03:10:25 AM

thanks Annis (Will?). Looks like we'll be looking to you for advice :p

Night Raider · December 23, 2009, 09:31:43 PM

LMFAO the cool nerds on fark.com decided they gotta mock the uncool nerds here.

Most of those commentators can't even "mate" yet, but you know in this world the tongue is often longer than reproductive organs.

So I say to hell with them, let them g-bang each other and we'll continue our studies in this awesome new language.

Brainiac · December 24, 2009, 05:35:12 AM

Quote from: NightRaider on December 23, 2009, 09:31:43 PM
LMFAO the cool nerds on fark.com decided they gotta mock the uncool nerds here.

Most of those commentators can't even "mate" yet, but you know in this world the tongue is often longer than reproductive organs.

So I say to hell with them, let them g-bang each other and we'll continue our studies in this awesome new language.

Whoa!
Down boy! Calm down