Na'vi learning materials in Chinese

[Kayrìlien]

Chinese does have v, z, and h.

Those are probably the non-native Chinese phonemes (hìtxoa if I'm wrong again, never really studied the language), and I thought h was [x] in Chinese and not [h] like in Na'vi.

The "h" sound in Chinese is somewhat in between those, but like any language, pronunciation varies widely between regions and dialects.

It doesn't have a proper ng (except a very light one in allophony with vowel nasalization), a proper Na'vi t (it is either slightly voiced or super-aspirated), or a proper k (same problem as g). It does have quite a few weird sounds with tons of allophonic symbols though.

I thought that Chinese (Pinyin) b, d, g = Na'vi p, t, k, or at least close enough....

The difference between the voiced and voiceless consonants' Pinyin representations has more to do with aspiration than voicing, and again, there's a lot of regional variance. I don't have much to go on besides two Taiwanese friends who have been showing me a thing or two, but they're both quite inconsistent with their speech. (It's hard for me to figure out the differences, and it's even harder for them to explain them.)

The only Chinese vowel that is pure is [a]; others are dipthongized ([oʊ], [ji], [wu], [jʏ]). Except in words ending in -n, the only allowed Chinese consonant follows the CV form or CVV form. Therefore, sample words would be useless, as the biggest problem for Chinese speakers is to pronounce word-final consonants without adding a schwa after them.

Would the bopomofo system be any help, or does it have the same restrictions as Pinyin does for transcribing sounds not native to Chinese? I don't know much about it.

Kayrìlien Tsmukanpa'litsyìp

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

The bopomofo system is worse. It is quite arbitrary, using some symbols to represent single phonemes and others to represent syllables. Plus, except in Taiwan, only 60+ years old people know bopomofo.

[Ikran Ahiyìk]

The bopomofo system is worse. It is quite arbitrary, using some symbols to represent single phonemes and others to represent syllables. Plus, except in Taiwan, only 60+ years old people know bopomofo.

Record them by "the initial sound of the word __" then.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Chinese people are usually taught from age 1 to not recognize what a "sound" is. For example, instead of telling them that "但" is [dan], three sounds, the baby books teach it as "duh-ahh-nuh" and the result is that Chinese people don't even subjectively hear schwas and add them everywhere, while in the same time not even realizing what a syllable is. Keftxo nang!

[Tsmuktengan]

Chinese people are usually taught from age 1 to not recognize what a "sound" is. For example, instead of telling them that "但" is [dan], three sounds, the baby books teach it as "duh-ahh-nuh" and the result is that Chinese people don't even subjectively hear schwas and add them everywhere, while in the same time not even realizing what a syllable is. Keftxo nang!

Very interesting. I did not know that, this means that learning material made for beginners in the west should be adapted for Asia then, since the way of learning in China (and probably in a few other states) has great differences.  

I hope the adaptation you have done will contribute to help people from China to learn and potentially participate here.  

[Kamean]

Chinese people are usually taught from age 1 to not recognize what a "sound" is. For example, instead of telling them that "但" is [dan], three sounds, the baby books teach it as "duh-ahh-nuh" and the result is that Chinese people don't even subjectively hear schwas and add them everywhere, while in the same time not even realizing what a syllable is. Keftxo nang!

MOE!  
I didn't know that too. Poor china children.

['Oma Tirea]

Chinese people are usually taught from age 1 to not recognize what a "sound" is. For example, instead of telling them that "但" is [dan], three sounds, the baby books teach it as "duh-ahh-nuh" and the result is that Chinese people don't even subjectively hear schwas and add them everywhere, while in the same time not even realizing what a syllable is. Keftxo nang!

This has me wondering for how many years this has been going on.

[Ikran Ahiyìk]

But this is reasonable since we recognize each pronunciation by each character.

Still, you know that dictionaries can record the sound by other words, something like 打 萬 切 for 但.. there should be some ideas to separate the C and V(+ nasal ending) section..

and C contains those we need

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

打万切 for 但??? At least we don't do that in the Mainland. Plus, [da.wan.tɕʰjœ] sounds nothing like [dan].

[Ikran Ahiyìk]

Fine.



切 means combining the initial sound of the first and the final sound of the second character into another single sound.

That is: da + wan -> dan

Never heard? Oh, then this doesn't work..



Then IPA would be the only solution and it solves all problems in some conditions.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Updated a whole bunch.

Ikran Ahiyìk, since you are probably the only one over here fluent in Chinese (except me) could you give me some ideas on how to do the adpositions table? Simple things like "ne" and "ka" are very hard to translate because Chinese technically doesn't have adpositions. Thanks!

[Ikran Ahiyìk]

If you have the time and effort, I think you may give more examples for them.. by several examples focusing on one specific item, the reader will more likely get it.

For the direct translation, maybe you may put down the translated one at once.

I'm also puzzled when I just saw the empty table, since I'm already not so able to distinguish some of them in English version...



Something I found when I scan through it. They may be useful..

Note 2.2 - syllable -> vowel would be more clear I think.
Note 2.3 - Actually they're not irregular, the extra e disappears simply because it is doubled. And then you can mention something more on this topic, eg. ay+yerik, fì-ìpxa (but this is not lenition-related.. make your choice..) This explains Note 6.1 also.
Note 3.6 - In fact tsaw is came from tsa'u, they are really the same thing, not simply matches.
Notes 3.7, 3.8 - Since the + and - signs have their special meaning, it would be better not to use + here.
Notes 3.2, 3.11 - More explanation? : When there are more than one third person pronouns appear in one clause, use sno replace all except the first one to show that all the pronouns are referring the same person, or show they are different individuals by not using sno. (Because I'm quite sure I won't get all these by reading only 他自己的..)
4.1 - The definite suffix for patientive case with noun ending in a vowel is -t only. -ti is suitable for both vowel and consonant ending nouns.
4.1 - The third example - It should be oenga-l: oeng is the contracted form, its full form is oenga, but when there is a case marker, contracted form is forbidden (or not?). But it's true that -al isn't a Na'vi suffix..
5.1.1 - They depend on whether the syllable with infix is stressed or not. Not irregular cases..
5.9 - «iv» for politeness use is outdated, now it is said that both are same in tone. (I think.. at least a note for this "history" is needed..)
5.9.1 - lu (stative) should be slu?
6.1 - I don't know about "太阳黄"...
Note 6.4 - It's true that we seldom use a-le-, but it can't said to be incorrect.
6.3 - Adverbs can describe adjectives, also verbs and other adverbs. nì- is not productive except for the adjectives (in root form), you may add this.

I think this is not only a translation task, but also updating. You know, the original one carries its own mistakes also, we can take this chance rewrite part of it, to make it more towards perfect. I didn't refer to it, so the above findings may be his problem (or mine, maybe..)

Lastly, you better get a cover page for it..