Main Menu

yayo alayon

Started by Kì'eyawn, June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kì'eyawn

Le'Ìnglìsìa tìrol awnomum nìtxan...

This is a work in progress, so any ideas, suggestions, corrections, etc. are appreciated—especially for the bits i wasn't able to translate.

Irayo, ma smuk =)

Ma yayo alayon rusol mì sìvawm txonä — 1
Munge fwela fay(me?)syalit ulte nume tswivayon — 2
Tìreymì nìwotx
Pamey ngal fìswawti nì'ul fte [to arise] — 3

Ma yayo alayon rusol mì sìvawm txonä- — 1
Munge keftxoa fay(me?)narit ulte nume tsive'a — 2
Tìreymì nìwotx
Pamey ngal fìswawti nì'ul fte [to be free] — 3

Tswayon, ma yayo alayon — 4
Tswayon, ma yayo alayon
Nemfa atan vawma txonä alayon...

Notes:
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...

Lance R. Casey

Nang, aylì'ut alor ngal terìng nì'ul ayoer! Oel sat stìyeftxeiaw. :)

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
Ma yayo alayon rusol mì sìvawm txonä
Here I'd use an attributive clause instead: yayo alayon a rerol ...

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
Munge fwela fay(me?)syalit ulte nume tswivayon
I presume that when demonstrative and dual/trial prefixes co-occur, they just follow each other as per fìmesyal. Fay-/tsay- seems to be one of those contractions brought about by vowel hiatus (or rather the avoidance of it in unstressed inflectional units); we also have one example (Jan 27) of this contraction not occurring. Also, I would personally place the adjective on the other side of the noun -- it simply feels better not to have it in direct contact with fì- somehow. Finally, I suspect using the modal-type syntax with nume might be a bit "too easy". This particular issue has been discussed at length before in the form of "learn to speak Na'vi" sentences, but I don't think we have something definitive to go on. Since what one is really absorbing is not an action, but an ability, perhaps nume fte tsivun tswivayon or something along those lines would be a better supported route to go. But, I don't know...

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
Pamey ngal fìswawti nì'ul fte [to arise]
Nì'ul: typo for nì'aw?
For "arise", how about kä nefä go up?

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
Ma yayo alayon rusol mì sìvawm txonä
Munge keftxoa fay(me?)narit ulte nume tsive'a
See above.

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
Pamey ngal fìswawti nì'ul fte [to be free]
There's that strange nì'ul again, and for "be free" I tentatively suggest fkol lonu ngat or slu 'awpo akeyawnìm, but a discrete word would be much preferable. Here's hoping for the LEP... ;)

// Lance R. Casey

Kì'eyawn

Kaltxì, ma Lance.  Ngeyä srungìri ngaru irayo seiyi oe.

I agree with you on nearly everything.

-Yes, i think an attributive clause works better at the top.

-I was thinking *fìmesyal myself, but having never seen anything like it my instinct was to say faysyal and assume the wings' "two-ness" would be understood from context.

-Yes, i think nume fte + SBJ is probably the right construction.  I've gotten too used to the modal construction.

-Argh, yes, typo.  Should be nì'aw.  No idea what i was thinking.

-Hmm... kä nefo, i guess that'll work until we have a more specific verb.  I'd actually been thinking fte lawnonu livu for the "to be free" bit, slä ke omum.

I appreciate the excellent feedback, ma tsmuk.
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...

Lance R. Casey

Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 05:26:40 PM
I'd actually been thinking fte lawnonu livu for the "to be free" bit, slä ke omum.
Unfortunately, that particular type of construction is prohibited:

Quote from: K. Pawl
The point of participles in Na'vi is that they're ONLY used attributively.
Hence my (perhaps awkward) insertion of 'awpo.

// Lance R. Casey

Kì'eyawn

#4
Quote from: Lance R. Casey on June 06, 2010, 05:57:07 PM
Quote from: tigermind on June 06, 2010, 05:26:40 PM
I'd actually been thinking fte lawnonu livu for the "to be free" bit, slä ke omum.
Unfortunately, that particular type of construction is prohibited:

Quote from: K. Pawl
The point of participles in Na'vi is that they're ONLY used attributively.
Hence my (perhaps awkward) insertion of 'awpo.

*facepalm*  And i just got done having this concept explained to me the other day.  Obviously, it didn't stick the first time.  I think your suggestion using fkol probably was the best, then—at least, until we get the vocab we need ;)  Ngeyä srungìri—ngeyä tìmwepeyrisì—ngaru irayo seiyi oe.

Edit:  Wow, when i can't even write in my own language, you know i need to get more sleep at night, or something...
eo Eywa oe 'ia

Fra'uri tìyawnur oe täpivìng nìwotx...