Moronic.

[archaic]

As in "That plan was moronic."

My guess is 'niskxawng' am I close?   

[Tìtstewan]

I'm afraid, skxawng is a noun, so it's not possible to add nì-

Maybe this:
That plan was bad.
Fìtìhawl lolu fe'.

Edit:
Or this:
That plan was dim.
Fìtìhawl lolu snumìna.

[archaic]

Full context .....

Textbook example of how not to do it."  [person A]
"Ill conceived, ill considered, ill judged, take your pick."  [person b]
"Harebrained, idiotic, careless, asinine, boneheaded, brainless, rash, witless, farcical, silly ..... "  [person C]
"Thank you [person C]." [person A]
" ..... pointless, balmy, senseless ..... "  [person C]
"Thank you ..... "[person A]
"thoughtless, vacuous, halfwitted, niskxawng ..... " [person C]
" .....  [person C]." [person A]
"What?" [person C]
"Thank you." [person A]
"You're welcome." [person C]
"They do say that fortune favors the bold." [person D]
"Fortes fortuna adiuvat. Look, it was ballsy alright, I'll give 'em that. Ballsy, but stupid." [person A]

The names have been changed to protect the innocent guilty.

[Kemaweyan]

I'm afraid, skxawng is a noun, so it's not possible to add nì-

I think we could add nì- to nouns as it is in nìolo', nìnrra, nìronsrel etc. But it's not productive

But in the sentence "That plan was moronic", "moronic" is an adjective, so we should add le- to skxawng. It also is not productive, but I think *leskxawng might be correct for "moronic" Anyway we need a confirmation.

Added:

Also we have mek that could be used metaphorically

[Tìtstewan]

I'm afraid, skxawng is a noun, so it's not possible to add nì-

I think we could add nì- to nouns as it is in nìolo', nìnrra, nìronsrel etc. But it's not productive

But in the sentence "That plan was moronic", "moronic" is an adjective, so we should add le- to skxawng. It also is not productive, but I think *leskxawng might be correct for "moronic" Anyway we need a confirmation.

Added:

Also we have mek that could be used metaphorically

This is what I mean, it's not productive.

Well, how about nìsnumìna? Overlooked the edit... mek woud fit well there.
But for this context probably this:
"thoughtless, vacuous, halfwitted, tenga fya'o na skxawng ..... " [person C]

[Clarke]

"[likely] invented by a moron?"  That phrasing fits the structure you've got above.

[archaic]

How about 'leskxusawng'?   

[Tìtstewan]

How about 'leskxusawng'?

Unfortunately, I never ever have seen this. As Kemaweyan has mentioned, le- is unproductive, and you cannot add an infix <us> into a noun. Don't confuse it with tì- <us> like in tìtusaron.

[archaic]

Sadly I have failed totally to even begin to understand linguistic terminology, I still have to look up verb and adjective, then guess it from there.


"It's not productive." Then cut it's wages and kick it's txìm until it produces more! 

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

"Not productive" means that it cannot be used to create a word.

I personally like snumìna. It is an adjective (a word that describes a noun), so it would work grammatically here. But by definition, that word can only be used for people, not for things like a plan. (That is what 'ofp' means in its definition.)

The next best is mek, which is good metaphorically, but it is just a bit of a stretch. - Fìtìhawl amek lolu would be the correct form, as the adjective needs to be next to the noun it describes. If you are trying to emphasize the futility of th plan, you could use Lolu Fìtìhawl amek.

The topical form of 'this plan' might be a possible choice, but it isn't as neat: Fìtìhawlìri 'u amek lolu (The topical is used to  set the topic of the sentence, and might be translated as 'concerning the (noun)'.)

I know the linguistic stuff bothers you, but you will get it eventually!

[Tìtstewan]

The next best is mek, which is good metaphorically, but it is just a bit of a stretch. - Fìtìhawl amek lolu would be the correct form, as the adjective needs to be next to the noun it describes. If you are trying to emphasize the futility of th plan, you could use Lolu Fìtìhawl amek.

Now I'm curious. I thought, that a at the adjectives were not necessary, if there is lu?
tsawke lu rim    The sun is yellow
saw lu ean    The sky is blue
Or there is something special, which I overlooked?

[archaic]

Please, would you humor me, why can't it be used to create such a word?

Ofp?
In this instance I'm going to disagree. Within the conversation, there's nothing to pin down whether it's the plan or the planners who were all these things, at least as far as that speaker is concerned. So I feel that Snumìna would fit, if maybe a shade lacking in it's degree of dimwittedness.


I wouldn't say the linguistic stuff bothers bothers me per se, it's just way over my head, stratospherically so.
I've spent decades banging my head against walls over this, basically from high school onwards.
I suspect that it doesn't entirely help, that my one and only language pays scant regard to the corpus of it's own rules. Had I grown up with a language that did, even halfheartedly, perhaps I'd have found this stuff would have come more naturally. Maybe.

[Tìtstewan]

Please, would you humor me, why can't it be used to create such a word?

As for the "not productive" thing, for example you can't use le- just to create an ajective, because the meaning of a word probably can change.
You can use *leskxawng, but keep in mind, that maybe in future - when it is confirmed - could have an other meaning than you have expected.

Ofp?
In this instance I'm going to disagree. Within the conversation, there's nothing to pin down whether it's the plan or the planners who were all these things, at least as far as that speaker is concerned. So I feel that Snumìna would fit, if maybe a shade lacking in it's degree of dimwittedness.

Ofp. means you can't use a word for objects. I just ask, if "plan" is an object?

[archaic]

I just ask, if "plan" is an object?

It is. Not necessarily a physically solid object, either written or drawn out on paper.

And as I said, the person who reeled off the adjectives has left unspecified whether it was the plan or the people who planned it, that she is offering descriptions for.

[Plumps]

The next best is mek, which is good metaphorically, but it is just a bit of a stretch. - Fìtìhawl amek lolu would be the correct form, as the adjective needs to be next to the noun it describes. If you are trying to emphasize the futility of th plan, you could use Lolu Fìtìhawl amek.

Now I'm curious. I thought, that a at the adjectives were not necessary, if there is lu?
tsawke lu rim    The sun is yellow
saw lu ean    The sky is blue
Or there is something special, which I overlooked?

No, you haven't Ngaru tìyawr, it's

     tsatìhawl lamu mek
     "that plan was empty/dumb/useless"

which I think is the best choice if you, ma archaic, want to stay in the realm of the Frommarian Canon, i.e. not use *leskxawng until it's confirmed.

We have these as examples,
     meka säfpìl 'an empty/dumb idea'
     meka säplltxevi 'an insipid/thoughtless comment'
     sämok amek 'a useless suggestion'
so, I think they go in the direction you described.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

I now recall that you are right about the a when there's a lu. But its odd because the adjective kind of takes on the role of an object in a sentence like that. I didn't even realize that was legal. Or is this an example of a predicate? (Which I cannot define easily, ma Archaic)

[Plumps]

Depending on which grammar you follow an adjective can be seen as a predicate, yes – that's why there is a distinction between the predicative adjective (the man is big) and the attributive adjective (the big man) But let's stay focused for now. If you wanted to say "it's a dumb plan" then lu tìhawl amek would of course work.
If it's to be "that plan is dumb" then lu tsatìhawl mek.

Notice that I left the word order the same in order to show the difference. We've established that lu can have the meaning of "there is" or "it is". So in this instance only the connecting -a- to the adjective would make it clear what is meant. Otherwise somthing like "that dumb plan is ... ... ..." would leave the listener/reader pondering over what the plan is

[Blue Elf]

If needed phrase can be reworded, there's example from Paul: (here):
Tìhawl lesngä'i lu tìkangkemvi skxawngä, slä pum alu fì'u yo' nì'aw.
'The original plan was the work of an idiot, but this one is just perfect.'

That plan was moronic -> Tsatìhawl lolu tìkangkemvi skxawngä

[archaic]

skxawngä

I like that, looks to this skxawng as if it should work very nicely in the context.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Depending on which grammar you follow an adjective can be seen as a predicate, yes – that's why there is a distinction between the predicative adjective (the man is big) and the attributive adjective (the big man) But let's stay focused for now. If you wanted to say "it's a dumb plan" then lu tìhawl amek would of course work.
If it's to be "that plan is dumb" then lu tsatìhawl mek.

Notice that I left the word order the same in order to show the difference. We've established that lu can have the meaning of "there is" or "it is". So in this instance only the connecting -a- to the adjective would make it clear what is meant. Otherwise somthing like "that dumb plan is ... ... ..." would leave the listener/reader pondering over what the plan is

I like how you put this, it is easy to remember!