help with this sentence

Motxokxen · December 24, 2009, 06:56:04 PM

help me out with this sentence:

mì fìtseng-ri o<ay>mu<ei>m si lu txantslusam
in here (subj) to learn(happily) be much-knowing

Txanirayo

tute nuereime · December 24, 2009, 08:24:29 PM

mì fìtseng -ri o<ay>m<ei>um si lu txantslusam
in here (subj) will know(happily) and be much-knowing
i think what you wanted to say was

mì fìtseng oel n<ay>um<ei>e si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) and will be wise

because in your first sentence the ri suffix makes it say something in relation to this place will know and be much knowing. please correct me if i am wrong

Atan · December 24, 2009, 11:15:42 PM

Quote from: tute nuereime on December 24, 2009, 08:24:29 PM
mì fìtseng -ri o<ay>m<ei>um si lu txantslusam
in here (subj) will know(happily) and be much-knowing
i think what you wanted to say was

mì fìtseng oel n<ay>um<ei>e si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) and will be wise

because in your first sentence the ri suffix makes it say something in relation to this place will know and be much knowing. please correct me if i am wrong

This looks about right, but oe should be either subjective (unmarked) or topical (-ri). It can only be agentive (-l) if it is performing the action of a transitive verb on an objective in the patientive case (-ti). So for there to be an agent, there must also be a patient. Because there are is no patient in the sentence, oe can't be the agent.

tute nuereime · December 24, 2009, 11:51:07 PM

so to be correct with the oel it would have to say
mì fìtseng oe-l n<ay>um<ei>e na'vi-ti si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) na'vi and will be wise
but to be correct without the -l it would just be
mì fìtseng oe n<ay>um<ei>e si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) and will be wise

Atan · December 24, 2009, 11:52:36 PM

Quote from: tute nuereime on December 24, 2009, 11:51:07 PM
so to be correct with the oel it would have to say
mì fìtseng oe-l n<ay>um<ei>e na'vi-ti si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) na'vi and will be wise
but to be correct without the -l it would just be
mì fìtseng oe n<ay>um<ei>e si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) and will be wise

Yep

tute nuereime · December 24, 2009, 11:59:16 PM

ok now that is starting to make sense

Motxokxen · December 25, 2009, 02:22:23 AM

Quote from: tute nuereime on December 24, 2009, 11:51:07 PM
so to be correct with the oel it would have to say
mì fìtseng oe-l n<ay>um<ei>e na'vi-ti si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) na'vi and will be wise
but to be correct without the -l it would just be
mì fìtseng oe n<ay>um<ei>e si layu txantslusam
in here i will learn(happy) and will be wise

your sentence does kinda approach the meaning but i did mean a regular " i " and not " ì "

the original message was supposed to be.
mì fìtseng -ri o<ay>m<ei>um si lu txantslusam
in here (subj) will know(happily) (modification to form a verb from know) be much-knowing
i was using the general rule that when a noun is applied with si, it forms a verb in the sense of "to make, to do", example: kelku "home", kelku si "to live (dwell)"
therefore to know, in future tense, with an applied verb, is to become knowledgeable or wise.

on second analysis:
running off of the si modification idea, perhaps "lu txantslusam" is not even required making the phrase
mì fìtseng -ri 'awpo o<ay>m<ei>um si
in here (subj) one individual to become knowing(happily) (modification to form a verb from know)

the final meaning of this expression is to mean

"in here one will happily become wise/knowledgeable "

tho I'm still not sure of the -ri, as i still do not fully comprehend the -ri, -ti, or -l idea. please correct me if I'm wrong.

irayo fpi ngayä kìte'e
thank you for the sake of your service

tute nuereime · December 25, 2009, 01:33:09 PM

that would be right but i believe the -ri would connect to 'awpo creating 'awpori or it might be spelled out as mì fìtseng 'awpol oaymeiumti si but i am not sure on that form

Atan · December 25, 2009, 04:35:50 PM

Si can be used to make verbs from nouns, but "know" is already a verb. So I don't think adding si makes sense here. If you want to say, "In here one will happily become wise/knowledgeable," you would probably say something like..

Fitseng-mì-ri 'awpo sl<ay><ei>u txantslusam.
In here-TOP one become-FUT-LAUD much.knowing
Here one will (happily) become wise.

I put the mì after fitseng just so the topic would be clear. But I'm not sure if that's how it would work exactly: I feel like there might be special rules on making a phrase the topic.

Quote from: tute nuereime on December 25, 2009, 01:33:09 PM
that would be right but i believe the -ri would connect to 'awpo creating 'awpori or it might be spelled out as mì fìtseng 'awpol oaymeiumti si but i am not sure on that form

The great thing about topic-comment languages is that the topic can be just about anything. It all depends on what you want to focus on. If the sentence is focusing on "here," then "here" should be the topic. But if "one" is more important, then it should take -ri. I would even venture a guess that there's some way that verbs can be made into the topic. In any case, what takes the topic marker is usually (though not always) the speaker's prerogative.

tute nuereime · December 25, 2009, 04:56:21 PM

so if you were telling your friend about something crazy you did you could put the emphasis on the verb like
it was so amazing i dived over the table. if you wanted to emphasize the fact that you dived you could put the -ri on dive

Atan · December 25, 2009, 05:51:20 PM

Hmm, I guess when I said that the topic is the speaker's prerogative, that wasn't exactly true (my bad.) It's not so much a matter of emphasis as it is focusing on the topic of conversation. If you were talking about diving (before,) then it would make sense to say "As for diving, I once dived over a table." The topic should be the focus of the conversation. So if what you're talking about is learnnavi.org, then it would make sense to put "here" in the topical case.

The noun that takes the topic can naturally change over the course of a conversation. For example:

Speaker 1: Oe-ri tawtute lu.
I-TOP sky.person am
(As for me,) I am a skyperson.

Speaker 2: Oe-ri Na'vi lu.
I-TOP Na'vi am
(As for me,) I am a Na'vi.

Speaker 1: Nga-ri Omatikaya lu srak?
You-TOP Omatikaya are Q
(As for you,) are you Omatikaya?

Speaker 2: Srane, oe-ri Omatikaya lu.
Yes, I-TOP Omatikaya am
Yes, I am Omatikaya.

Speaker 1: Omatikaya-ri taron nìltsan srak?
Omatikaya-TOP hunt well Q
(As for the Omatikaya,) do they hunt well?

Speaker 2: Srane, Omatikaya-ri ikran-hu taron.
Yes, Omatikaya-TOP ikran-with hunt.
Yes, the Omatikaya hunt with ikran.

Speaker 1: Nga-ri ikran tok srak?
You-TOP ikran exist Q
(As for you,) do you have an ikran? (lit. As for you, is there an ikran?)

Etc.

So you can see how the topic can change over the course of a conversation. And again, it's not really about emphasis (as my previous post might have led you to believe $:-\$ ) but more about the topic of conversation: in the example, the speakers go from talking about themselves to talking about the Omatikaya, then back to themselves again. If you're ever in doubt, it really is useful to think of the topic marker as meaning "as for."

Hope that wasn't too confusing! ^_^;;

tute nuereime · December 25, 2009, 06:03:59 PM

so if the topic of the conversation was riding ikran then would riding have the -ri or would the ikran?

Atan · December 25, 2009, 06:10:43 PM

My guess would be riding (and it would probably need to be nominalized,) though I'm not sure. For example:

Ikran tì-makto-ri ke ftue lu.
Ikran NMLZ-ride-TOP NEG easy is
(As for) riding ikran (it) is not easy.

Of course this is all speculation based on natural topic-comment languages (I'm drawing a lot on Japanese.) Paul Frommer might very well have created some different rules that we don't know about yet.

wm.annis · December 25, 2009, 06:20:18 PM

Quote from: Atan on December 25, 2009, 06:10:43 PMIkran tì-makto-ri ke ftue lu.
Ikran NMLZ-ride-TOP NEG easy is
(As for) riding ikran (it) is not easy.

Hmm. I suspect ikran needs a case marking or a preposition or something, so you know the relationship of it to "riding." But I have no clue what the correct phrasing would be.

Atan · December 25, 2009, 06:47:06 PM

Yeah, I thought about maybe putting the patientive marker -ti on it, but then I wondered whether that would be appropriate without an agent. Ah the difficulties of free word order.