Lenition of prefixes

Started by Wllìm, July 15, 2014, 12:15:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tìtstewan

I have no idea of an example with three prefixes plus adposition. :-\

-| 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. |-

Kemaweyan

pe + tsa does not make any sense. What it could mean? "Which that"? :-\
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tìtstewan

*Pesayhelkut ngal folrrfen?
Which of that houses you have visited?

...well, it sounds a bit weird, it makes more sense with srak.


---
(this remindes me somehow on the discussion about fray+ - all of these :P)

-| 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. |-

Kemaweyan

Quote from: Tìtstewan on July 16, 2014, 03:05:52 PM
*Pesayhelkut ngal folrrfen?
Which of that houses you have visited?

...well, it sounds a bit weird, it makes more sense with srak.

I think we should use something like takip here: pehelkut a takip tsapum ngal folrrfen?

And srak would not work here because there is not "yes/no" question.

Quote from: Tìtstewan on July 16, 2014, 03:05:52 PM
(this remindes me somehow on the discussion about fray+ - all of these :P)

You're right, it's very similar thing. And fray+ is incorrect too :)
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

hard to split posts into a new thread because of derailment, if most of these posts also contain an on-topic portion.. :S

Anyways.. so yeah. The triple lenition of prefixes thing is cool. I think it means something, but it's hard to say what it would be in English:

Quote from: Tìtstewan on July 16, 2014, 02:19:08 PM
fesayhelku

In which those-houses? It does seem kind of clunky. Maybe this could be possible like this?:

A: oel tsole'a mì sayhelku 'uot. (I saw something in those houses)
B: mì fesayhelku? (in which those houses?)

:-\ ???

Kemaweyan

I think it's possible idiomatically only: in which "those houses"? Even with sarcasm..

IMO, nouns in Na'vi have some slots for prefixes and suffixes. I think pe+ and fì- (tsa-) use same (first) slot which is before ay+/me+/pxe+. I think so because tsa'u could be an answer to question peu? So pe+ and tsa- (fì-) have similar meaning and play the same role. Those all have demonstrative meaning. I don't think that we could use them together...
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

That would also seem to make a lot of sense. Hmm :-\

Kemaweyan

What? pe + fì and pe + tsa?
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tirea Aean

The idea that there are slots, and pe+ and fì-/tsa- are both in the same slot and only one can be chosen.

[pe|tsa|fì|fra][ay|me|pxe][fne|sna|...]root{suffixes}

`Eylan Ayfalulukanä

A lot of confusion in these cases can be eliminated by using -pe+ postpositionally.

One easy way for beginners to remember lenition rules is that lenition is done for sound and flow reasons, and not for grammar reasons. Thus, it always applies to the following sound, regardless of what it is part of.

Yawey ngahu!
pamrel si ro [email protected]

Tay'waro

Quote from: Kemaweyan on July 16, 2014, 03:17:40 PM
Quote from: Tìtstewan on July 16, 2014, 03:05:52 PM
*Pesayhelkut ngal folrrfen?
Which of that houses you have visited?

...well, it sounds a bit weird, it makes more sense with srak.

I think we should use something like takip here: pehelkut a takip tsapum ngal folrrfen?
See no difference to use takip. From the manual: pe+ should be understood rather as - "of which" rather than "what". mì fesayhelku as an example, I wanted to use in a sentence:
    Fko tsun kelku sivi mì fesayhelku?
    In which of those houses can I live?

Wllìm

#31
If it would be possible to combine pe- with a demonstrative such as tsa-, I think "which of those houses" would be just pesakelku ("which-that-house") instead of pesayhelku. Namely, if you say "In which of those houses..." you only mean one house, right?

However, the idea of "slots" makes a lot of sense in my opinion. This also is given in Horen 3.3.7:



3.3.7.  Combinations. The prenouns may combine on a single word, in this order -



fi-
tsa-
pe+


fra-


number marking


fne-


the noun


-pe
Only one from each column may be used, and of course the question affix is only used once. The full details of this ordering are not yet confirmed for fra-.



This would indicate that pe- and tsa- don't go together, at least not both at the beginning. tsakelkupe is still possible it seems. Still I think that it is a quite strange construction and I don't know whether it is possible at all. I agree with Kemaweyan that it is probably only used in sarcastic constructions as

Awnga yayom mì sakelku.
- Tsakelkupe? Oel ke tse'a kea kelkuti tsatseng.
We will eat in that house.
- Which "that house"? I don't see a house there. ;D

Kemaweyan

I think pe+ is a question and tsa- (fì-) is an answer to this question. How it could be possible to use them together?
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Tìtstewan

Hmm, it seems that - and tsa- are weird with pe+...so I'm agree with Kemaweyan.
But
Pefaysäfpìl sìltsan lu? / Payfìsäfpìl sìltsan lu?
Which of these ideas are good?
:-\

-| 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. |-

Kemaweyan

Quote from: Tìtstewan on July 17, 2014, 07:49:06 AM
Hmm, it seems that - and tsa- are weird with pe+...so I'm agree with Kemaweyan.
But
Pefaysäfpìl sìltsan lu? / Payfìsäfpìl sìltsan lu?
Which of these ideas are good?
:-\

It's the same. A question pe+ with an answer fay+ ??? I think we should use just pay+: which ideas? "Of these" would be obvious from the context or you can add that via takip:

  Takip faysäfpìl pefum sìltsan lu?
  Which of these ideas are good?
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Kemaweyan

I think there should be syulang in singular as in these examples:

  Nantangìl yom yerikit.
  Viperwolves eat hexapedes.

  Palulukan lu lehrrap.
  Thanators are dangerous.

http://naviteri.org/2011/07/number-in-na%E2%80%99vi/

Quote from: Blue Elf on July 18, 2014, 01:22:00 PM
"Every fifth day" works like adverb - it specifies time, so no a, but more serious issue is to attach fra- to the number. Is it allowed? Fra- is for nouns only, so I'd would use it differently.

Tsawke slu vawm fratrr amuve - Sun becomes dark every fifth day.

Opinions?

I completely agree.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Kemaweyan

Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on July 18, 2014, 02:56:01 PM
The conclusion I have is that the word means 'one' kind of semantically. It can't be pluralizied as a word, but I suspect that if the original noun was plural, pum in effect becomes plural, as it represents the previously referenced noun. So, it would be confusing at minimum for pum to differ in number number from the referenced noun's number.

I don't agree. Pum doesn't mean the same thing (things). it means another instance (instances) of such thing. So if you're talking about one thing in first part of the sentence, you also could say about several things in the second part. To express this I think we should use pum in plural.

Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on July 18, 2014, 02:56:01 PM
And of course, there is no requirement that you have to use pum. You can always reuse the referenced noun. It might even be OK in this case to change the noun's number on the second usage.

You're right. But what about this:

 Tsasyulang ke sunu oer, slä faysyulang lor lu.
 I don't like that flower, but these flowers are nice.

How we should use pum here (instead of faysyulang)? I guess fayfum would work here.
Nìrangal frapo tsirvun pivlltxe nìNa'vi :D

Blue Elf

Quote from: Kemaweyan on July 18, 2014, 03:06:49 PM
Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on July 18, 2014, 02:56:01 PM
And of course, there is no requirement that you have to use pum. You can always reuse the referenced noun. It might even be OK in this case to change the noun's number on the second usage.

You're right. But what about this:

 Tsasyulang ke sunu oer, slä faysyulang lor lu.
 I don't like that flower, but these flowers are nice.

How we should use pum here (instead of faysyulang)? I guess fayfum would work here.
Good theme for next LEP submission. Thinking about to step in.
Oe lu skxawng skxakep. Slä oe nerume mi.
"Oe tasyätxaw ulte koren za'u oehu" (Limonádový Joe)


Plumps

Quote from: Blue Elf on July 18, 2014, 01:22:00 PM
Quote from: Kemaweyan on July 17, 2014, 09:57:47 AM
Quote from: Blue Elf on July 17, 2014, 09:27:39 AM
Pum has no plural, so *tsayfum seems to be not allowed.

Has it been confirmed?
I'm quite sure I read it in Horen, but there's no such note there. So I had to saw it somewhere else, but I can't remember where.... maybe Plumps will know.

I'm also quite positive that it is not marked for number.
The only official example sentence I can find is in the Listening Exercise of Txewì's story:

Lam set fwa Sawtute akawng holum, pum asìltsan 'ì'awn.
Now it seems that the bad Skypeople have left, the good ones remain.

Tirea Aean

#39
First official usage of pum:

Quote from: http://naviteri.org/2010/06/first-post/Ma oeyä eylan, faysänumviri rutxe fì'ut tslivam: Nìltsan omum oel futa ayhapxìtul lì'fyaolo'ä awngeyä txantsana aysänumvit ngolop fte aylaru kivar. Faysulfätuä tìkangkem oheru meuia luyu nìngay. Kllkxayem fìtìkangkem oeyä rofa7—ke io—pum°10 feyä.

It refers to a plural noun. edit: nvm it refers to tìkangkem. I (still) believe pum works like this:

Fol aysänumvit ngolop.
Pum feyä = theirs = their ones = their instructions (plural)

Oel sänumvit ngolop
Pum oeyä = mine = my one = my instruction (singular)

Pretty sure I read somewhere based on all Pawl's usages of pum to refer to both singular or plurals that there is no plural of pum.

I will split this thread when able, each topic in its own thread.