Author Topic: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'  (Read 2796 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3074
  • Karma: 143
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« on: April 05, 2011, 05:23:05 pm »
Si-construction verbs are strange enough that it seems useful to collect all that we know about them in one place.  I do so in my reference grammar, but the information about them isn't all in one place, nor do I include the links to every one of Pawl's pronouncements about them.  I'll do that here.


The Na'vi si-verb is a particular construction in which a noun or adjective element is followed immediately1 by the element si.  The resulting phrase is taken together to be a verb, so:

  srung si to help
  irayo si to thank
  win si to rush something

All verb inflections (tense, aspect, mood, etc.) go into the si element:

  irayo sayi will thank

The only time the X si order is broken is to negate the verb, with either ke or rä'ä:2

  oeru irayo ke soli (he) didn't thank me
  tsaru ätxäle rä'ä si! don't ask for that!

The main grammatical strangeness with these verbs is that they are intransitive.  The subject must take the (no-ending) subjective case.  If there is something like a "direct object" it will go into the dative, not the patientive:3, 4

  oe ngaru irayo si I thank you.
  po kavuk soli awngar He betrayed us.

Si-verbs do not have gerunds.  Instead, the simple noun is used.5  Si-verbs do have participles, but the resulting word is hyphenated in writing, with the attributive a attaching to the entire hyphenated phrase:6

  srung-susia tute
  tute asrung-susi

If a noun is the element in a si-verb, then an attributive adjective may be attached to it in the usual way:7

  wina uvan si play a quick game

If you are answering or repeating part of a si-verb phrase, you can drop the noun part and just use an inflected form of si alone:8

  Nga tsap'alute soli srak?
  (Srane,) soli.

_____
   1 In A few quickies from Frommer he says that all in si-verbs except irayo si the word order is fixed: X si.
   2 From Ultxa Ayharuä: Ke.
   3 Extracts from various emails (Jan 29).
   4 Si Constructions.
   5 Ultxa Ayharyuä: Refinements of si-construction verbs.
   6 Ultxa Ayharyuä: Participles
   7 Ultxa Ayharyuä: Refinements of si-construction verbs.
   8 Auxiliary Verb SI
« Last Edit: April 21, 2011, 07:39:07 pm by wm.annis »
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2011, 05:52:53 pm »
What about the bit about using si alone when the other word is clear from context?  From http://forum.learnnavi.org/language-updates/auxilary-verb-si-possessive-dative-krr/

Quote
About the only time si stands alone is when the non-verbial element has already been mentioned and is understood from the concept.  The example he gave of this was...

--Nga tsap'alute soli srak?
--Soli.

Though looking at that, it seems like I had a minor error in transcription, not sure why I went from "discourse" to "concept", I think I meant to say context....  This is the original wording from Frommer.
Quote from: Karyu Pawl
About the only time si stands alone is when the non-verbal element has already been mentioned and is understood from the discourse:

--Nga tsap'alute soli srak?
--Soli.

(Or: Srane, soli.)
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3074
  • Karma: 143
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #2 on: April 05, 2011, 05:58:45 pm »
Ooh, good.

I also need to find a citation for the oddball use when the noun part of a N si construction is a relative clause pivot.  We have examples, but no canon citations available (as far as I can see).
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2011, 06:31:40 pm »
You mean like my "Oel tse'a kemit a nga soli" example in the other thread?

I've lost track of so many of the examples we've gotten, I don't even know if that sort of example exists from Frommer.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Plumps

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 6199
  • Karma: 223
  • ’Ivong Na’vi
    • Aylì'uä Ramunong (Pìlok)
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #4 on: April 06, 2011, 06:50:07 am »
This is really helpful.
Thank you so much, ma William

If a noun is the element in a si-verb, then an attributive adjective may be attached to it in the usual way:7

  wina uvan si play a quick game

Makes me wonder whether *uvan awin si is also possible  :-\ What happens if it’s a quick and fun game?
« Last Edit: April 06, 2011, 09:45:00 am by Plumps »

Offline Sireayä mokri

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 6012
  • Karma: 35
  • Veritas vos liberabit
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2011, 09:13:47 am »
It looks like I have to abandon my long-standing habit of putting stuff between kem and si :) Irayo ma William.
When the mirror speaks, the reflection lies.

Offline 'Oma Tirea

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3874
  • Karma: 50
  • Na'vi... sleru... rusti...
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2011, 11:08:27 pm »
It looks like I have to abandon my long-standing habit of putting stuff between kem and si :) Irayo ma William.

Speaking of which, how would fko use that verb if fko can't split up the kem and the si, as if trying to translate something like the action that *noun* did?  Does it have to be strictly something like *tstxolì'u* a kem soli?

Related:

Makes me wonder whether *uvan awin si is also possible  :-\

...and I suspect you can't do that either....

???

[img]http://swokaikran.skxawng.lu/sigbar/nwotd.php?p=2b[/img]

ÌTXTSTXRR!!

Srake serar le'Ìnglìsìa lì'fyayä aylì'ut?  Nari si älofoniru rutxe!!

Offline Nyx

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 56
  • Eywìng te Eana Txon'ite
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #7 on: April 07, 2011, 07:50:10 am »
Makes me wonder whether *uvan awin si is also possible  :-\ What happens if it’s a quick and fun game?
Maybe that'd require something like wina uvan si nì'o'

Offline Sireayä mokri

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 6012
  • Karma: 35
  • Veritas vos liberabit
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #8 on: April 07, 2011, 08:10:43 am »
Speaking of which, how would fko use that verb if fko can't split up the kem and the si, as if trying to translate something like the action that *noun* did?

Kem a *tstxolì'u* soli. It's basically the same as Oel tse'a kemit a nga soli, where the second kem (which should follow a) is omitted due to being clear from the context.
When the mirror speaks, the reflection lies.

Offline Tirea Aean

  • The Blue One
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9965
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 243
  • Oeri ran lu srung
    • Tirea Aean
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #9 on: July 01, 2011, 06:21:33 pm »
Speaking of which, how would fko use that verb if fko can't split up the kem and the si, as if trying to translate something like the action that *noun* did?

Kem a *tstxolì'u* soli. It's basically the same as Oel tse'a kemit a nga soli, where the second kem (which should follow a) is omitted due to being clear from the context.

We can actually do this? Have we any canon in its favor?

I've been using

"Ngeyä kemit tsatseng oel tse'a"

instead of

"Oel tse'a kemit a nga soli tsatseng"

for the very reason that stuff shouldnt come between kem and si...

kelku ikranä a hawnventi yom podcast (na'vi-only): https://open.spotify.com/show/2wphPUbaeR6srA05Rh0t3O
Learn Na'vi Discord Chat: https://discord.gg/WF6qcmv

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2011, 06:46:41 pm »
As far as I know, still no canon examples, just the statement from Frommer about using si alone I quoted earlier in this thread which seems (to my reading) to say you can do it.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Tirea Aean

  • The Blue One
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9965
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 243
  • Oeri ran lu srung
    • Tirea Aean
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2011, 06:50:41 pm »
I remember back in the day when we were told not to carboncopy english with using si, that it is not a verb on its own but needs a noun. Thinking about this, Why would it be a crime to attach attributes to the noun? but the thing is, in the I see what you did there sentence, there is the si alone in its clause. if this is okay, it implies that using si as a general standalone verb in any other clause is okay.

which is why it has crossed my mind, be it redundantly redundant, to say

I see the action which you did that action there.
oel tse'a kemit a tsakem soli nga tsatseng.

hm.

As far as I know, still no canon examples, just the statement from Frommer about using si alone I quoted earlier in this thread which seems (to my reading) to say you can do it.
* Tirea Aean searches

EDIT:

Quote from: Karyu Pawl
About the only time si stands alone is when the non-verbal element has already been mentioned and is understood from the discourse:

--Nga tsap'alute soli srak?
--Soli.

(Or: Srane, soli.)


Yep, that sure says it to me too that it is possible.
* Tirea Aean makes a note.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2011, 06:53:32 pm by Tirea Aean »

kelku ikranä a hawnventi yom podcast (na'vi-only): https://open.spotify.com/show/2wphPUbaeR6srA05Rh0t3O
Learn Na'vi Discord Chat: https://discord.gg/WF6qcmv

Offline wm.annis

  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3074
  • Karma: 143
  • Translate the meaning, not the words!
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2011, 07:06:34 pm »
We can actually do this? Have we any canon in its favor?

Frommer's comments on my early Coyote Tale translation included this complete reworking of a line:

"Coyote was happy.
Now he knew what to do."

’Efu Nantang nitram.
Zene sivi a kemit olomum.


This does seem to indicate that si can be separated from its noun so long as that separation takes the form of a relative clause attached to that noun.
'Awa lì'fya ke tam kawkrr.
A Na'vi Reference Grammar

Offline omängum fra'uti

  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Karma: 127
  • Na'vi's first grammar nazi
    • Pronounced Na'vi words
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2011, 08:29:48 pm »
I remember back in the day when we were told not to carboncopy english with using si, that it is not a verb on its own but needs a noun. Thinking about this, Why would it be a crime to attach attributes to the noun? but the thing is, in the I see what you did there sentence, there is the si alone in its clause. if this is okay, it implies that using si as a general standalone verb in any other clause is okay.
It isn't a crime to attach attribution to a noun.  I believe I asked about this last October and posted it as one of the updates.  You can "peyä uvan si" to play his game or "wina kemo si" to do something quick, for example.

But that's not what is happening in "kem a nga soli".  It sounds like you're interpreting it as "kem a nga soli" (with the verb phrase in red) but that is not the case at all.  In reality it is more like "kem a nga [tsakem] soli", where the noun which is paired with si is just implied/contextual.
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

Offline Tirea Aean

  • The Blue One
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9965
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 243
  • Oeri ran lu srung
    • Tirea Aean
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2011, 10:33:52 pm »
my mind's all over the place.

I was thingking

kemo awin si

AND

kem a nga si

for some reason...either way, they're both correct, kefyak?

kelku ikranä a hawnventi yom podcast (na'vi-only): https://open.spotify.com/show/2wphPUbaeR6srA05Rh0t3O
Learn Na'vi Discord Chat: https://discord.gg/WF6qcmv

Offline Sireayä mokri

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 6012
  • Karma: 35
  • Veritas vos liberabit
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2011, 08:44:10 am »
I think only wina kemo si would be correct. In kem a nga si (natkenong, sunu oer kem a nga [tsakem] si) kem is not a part of kem si construction, but a subject of the first clause.
When the mirror speaks, the reflection lies.

Offline Tirea Aean

  • The Blue One
  • Olo'eyktan Anawm
  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 9965
  • nv Eywa'eveng
  • Karma: 243
  • Oeri ran lu srung
    • Tirea Aean
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2011, 04:22:04 pm »
I think only wina kemo si would be correct. In kem a nga si (natkenong, sunu oer kem a nga [tsakem] si) kem is not a part of kem si construction, but a subject of the first clause.

Agreed, I si my stupidity now. xD

kelku ikranä a hawnventi yom podcast (na'vi-only): https://open.spotify.com/show/2wphPUbaeR6srA05Rh0t3O
Learn Na'vi Discord Chat: https://discord.gg/WF6qcmv

Offline Neyn'ite Te Tsahìk Txeptsyìp'ite

  • Palulukan Makto
  • *****
  • Posts: 1119
  • Karma: 11
Re: Na'vi Linguistics: in the Deep 'Si'
« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2011, 08:14:45 pm »
damn, I am glad I finally know how to use/say 'will'! (sort of :P)
old gallery link?id=2025[/img]


oel ayngati kameie, ma aysmukan sì aysmuke, Eywa ayngahu.
oeyä tsmukan, ma Nick, oeru ngaytxoa livu. nìmwey tsurokx. nga yawne lu oer.

 

Become LearnNavi's friend on Facebook Follow LearnNavi on Twitter! Watch LearnNavi's videos on YouTube

SMF 2.0.17 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines | XHTML | RSS | WAP2 | Site Rules

LearnNavi is not affiliated with the official Avatar website,
James Cameron, LightStorm Entertainment or The Walt Disney Company.
All trademarks and servicemarks are the properties of their respective owners.
Images in the LearnNavi.org Forums and Gallery may not be used without permission.

LearnNavi Affiliates:
ToS

LearnNavi is the community to learn Na'vi, the Avatar Language
"A place where real friendships are made." -Paul Frommer

AvatarMeet | Learn Na'vi Forum | Learn Na'vi Wiki | Na'viteri

LearnNavi