Should

[Muzer]

I couldn't find a word for "should" in the dictionary, and I think I need it for a sentence - must is too strong, and maybe... must would imply something else.

(The sentence in question is: The webmaster should update the certificate - after a sentence about it being out-of-date. Must would imply that the webmaster HAS to do it, which they don't, and "maybe the webmaster must update the certificate" implies that Opera is uncertain whether or not they have to, rather than it meaning that they should should).

[wm.annis]

I couldn't find a word for "should" in the dictionary, and I think I need it for a sentence - must is too strong,

This is an English problem.  Not all languages make a distinction between "should" and "must".  Absent an update from Frommer, zene is probably fine.

[Muzer]

OK, that's good then. So there's no distinction between "I strongly recommend that you" and "It is mandatory that you" in Na'vi? Interesting...

[wm.annis]

OK, that's good then. So there's no distinction between "I strongly recommend that you" and "It is mandatory that you" in Na'vi? Interesting...

Sure there is.  It's just not encoded with two verbs separated by a narrow semantic divide. 

[Muzer]

Lol, I suppose so - I can't even think of a more long-winded way to say it though, I think we probably lack the vocab (though I'm not very good at finding stuff like this as you may have noticed)

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I couldn't find a word for "should" in the dictionary, and I think I need it for a sentence - must is too strong,

This is an English problem.  Not all languages make a distinction between "should" and "must".  Absent an update from Frommer, zene is probably fine.

Could you not distinguish with <iv>?

Adding <iv> into it would lessen the strength of it by its possible counterfactuality and would make it closer to should.

[wm.annis]

Could you not distinguish with <iv>?

Adding <iv> into it would lessen the strength of it by its possible counterfactuality and would make it closer to should.

It seems to me this depends on Na'vi politeness strategies in the whole.  I suppose a subjunctive is possible, but there may be other ways to select a toned-down sense for zene.  The subjunctive is already doing quite a lot in Na'vi.  It can't do everything and still mean something.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I'm not sure that this is related to the way that western european languages use subjunctives or conditionals for politeness, it seems to be a natural extension of the way na'vi can use <iv> in 'soft' imperatives.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Or, use a construct that amounts to 'Its a good idea to'. Without looking them up, I believe words exist to do that.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

Or, use a construct that amounts to 'Its a good idea to'. Without looking them up, I believe words exist to do that.

säfpìl asìltsan lu fwa is what I'd say for that.

But that is quite an idiomatic phrase even if it can be figured out reasonably easily, I certainly don't feel comfortable translating it literally.

[wm.annis]

I'm not sure that this is related to the way that western european languages use subjunctives or conditionals for politeness, it seems to be a natural extension of the way na'vi can use <iv> in 'soft' imperatives.

Well, that's a little odd semantically to me.  Obligation is an internal state, and we don't usually give imperatives like, "be tired!  be hungry!"  On the other hand, it's probably not an unprecedented bit of grammaticalization.

This was asked about in the LEP, so we can expect a ruling eventually.

[kewnya txamew'itan]

I'm not sure that this is related to the way that western european languages use subjunctives or conditionals for politeness, it seems to be a natural extension of the way na'vi can use <iv> in 'soft' imperatives.

Well, that's a little odd semantically to me.  Obligation is an internal state, and we don't usually give imperatives like, "be tired!  be hungry!"  On the other hand, it's probably not an unprecedented bit of grammaticalization.

This was asked about in the LEP, so we can expect a ruling eventually.

The way I interpret it's use in 'soft' imperatives was that it was used to soften the meaning in which case this would be a natural extension. By your analysis (which is probably better), I can see that it isn't.

Glad to know it's been asked.

Also, it certainly isn't unprecidented, Spanish does this with the conditional which is a known use of <iv>.